University of Montana
ScholarWorks at University of Montana
Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers
Graduate School
2016
“The Most Poisonous of All Diseases of Mind or
Body”: Colorphobia and the Politics of Reform
April J. Gemeinhardt
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd
Part of the Disease Modeling Commons, Disorders of Environmental Origin Commons, History
of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons, Intellectual History Commons, Mental Disorders
Commons, Other Mental and Social Health Commons, Political History Commons, Social History
Commons, and the United States History Commons
Recommended Citation
Gemeinhardt, April J., "“The Most Poisonous of All Diseases of Mind or Body”: Colorphobia and the Politics of Reform" (2016).
Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers. Paper 10662.
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for
inclusion in Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more
information, please contact [email protected].
“THE MOST POISONOUS OF ALL DISEASES OF MIND OR BODY”: COLORPHOBIA
AND THE POLITICS OF REFORM
By
April Joanne Gemeinhardt
Bachelor of Arts, University of La Verne, La Verne, California, 2014
Associate in Arts, Citrus College, Glendora, California, 2011
Thesis
presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Master of Arts in History
The University of Montana, Missoula, MT
May 2016
Approved by:
Scott Whittenburg, Dean of The Graduate School
Graduate School
Dr. Kyle G. Volk, Chair,
History Department
Dr. Anya Jabour
History Department
Dr. George Price
Native American Studies
Contents
Acknowledgments
Introduction
1
Chapter 1
Adopting Colorphobia
12
Chapter 2
Deploying Colorphobia
49
Chapter 3
Impact of Colorphobia
89
Epilogue
The Fate of Colorphobia
115
Bibliography
131
ii
Gemeinhardt, April, M.A., Spring 2016
History
Abstract
Chairperson: Kyle G. Volk
Focusing on the mid-1830s through 1865, this thesis explores colorphobia—the irrational fear
and hatred of black people otherwise known as racial prejudice—as a reform tactic adopted by
abolitionists. It argues that colorphobia played a pivotal role in the radical abolitionist reform
agenda for promoting anti-slavery, immediate emancipation, equal rights, and black
advancement. By framing racial prejudice as a disease, abolitionists believed connotations,
stigmas, and fears of illness would elicit more attention to the rapidly increasing racial prejudice
in the free North and persuade prejudiced white Americans into changing their ways.
Abolitionists used parallels to cholera, choleraphobia (fear of cholera), and hydrophobia (fear of
water, a reference to rabies), to legitimate colorphobia during a period of epidemics and immense
fear of disease, and played off of nineteenth-century disease understandings to make their
argument more persuasive. Burgeoning free black populations added to the heightened sense of
terror and paranoia because of stereotypes that claimed African Americans spread diseases.
Colorphobia produced two very different reactions—the use of the idea of negrophobia by antiabolitionists in the U.S. and a transnational abolitionist response. Anti-abolitionists responded
with their own disease adapted from the abolitionist agenda. “Negrophobia,” once
interchangeably used with colorphobia, became known as “the disease of abolition.” By
insinuating that abolitionists were crazed over elevating the black population, anti-abolitionists
hoped to maintain the racial status quo and discredit abolitionists. The use of negrophobia also
revealed white anxieties over the future of an equal America and provided social commentary on
the free black population. By contrast to American anti-abolitionists, British and Canadian
abolitionists joined American abolitionists in the battle against colorphobia and turned racial
prejudice into a transnational problem. British abolitionists denounced racial prejudice in their
writings to support the fight for immediate emancipation and equal rights, while Canada spoke
out against colorphobia as it spread into its provinces. This thesis reveals the centrality of
colorphobia to the abolitionist reform agenda and its significance to the movement. It shows how
disease rhetoric advanced the desires of a small reform group, and allowing colorphobia to play a
central role in emancipation and equal rights.
iii
Acknowledgements
This project would not have been possible without the various people who supported me
over the past two years. I am forever grateful to my committee for all the assistance, suggestions,
and advice during the creation of my Master’s thesis: Kyle G. Volk, Anya Jabour, and George
Price. Kyle Volk challenged me intellectually. He pushed me to expand my thinking and
improve my writing all while providing me with unwavering support. I will be forever indebted
to him for shaping me into a better intellectual—but also for making me a better person. Anya
Jabour took on the task of being a committee member for my project with so many other
commitments already on her calendar. Her dedication to the historical field and students amazes
me. George Price’s curiosity and interest in my project spurred me to work even harder. I hope to
be just as kind, wise, and inquisitive as him in future endeavors. Also thank you to Jeff Wiltse,
Robert Greene, and Michael Mayer for making my experience a positive one.
Other people that deserve my thanks are beloved professors, family, and friends. Dr.
Stephen Sayles and Dr. Kenneth Marcus encouraged my pursuit of graduate education and
believed in me more than I could ever believe in myself. Kristin Howland provided me with
advice that helped me succeed over the past two years. The most thanks goes to my parents,
Vern and Elaine Gemeinhardt, for their never-ending support and unconditional love. All the
encouragement made the long writing process much more bearable. Without them I would not be
where I am today. Thank you to my friends back home in California and others outside of the
Golden State—you know who you are. A special thanks goes to Mallory Sholtz for constantly
reading my project as it evolved, for never giving up on me, and for always being a great friend.
iv
Introduction
In September of 1844, evening descended in Utica, New York as several travelers
boarded a carriage. Under the cloak of nightfall, they passed the time discussing political issues
and soon arrived at abolitionism. One passenger named Mr. Brown spoke in such strong favor of
abolition that one passenger inserted amalgamation into the conversation. The man asked, “Sir,
would you suffer one of your daughters to marry a colored man?”1 Brown said yes, and in fact,
he declared that no other kind of man would marry his daughter. Shocked to silence, the other
passengers dropped the topic. Morning came, and the passengers awoke to the sight of Brown’s
skin color. They had failed to notice his blackness from the darkness of travel, and all were
aghast that he sat alongside them throughout the overnight trip. When the carriage stopped for
breakfast, one white passenger refused to eat alongside Brown. A worker offered Brown a
separate table, but he refused to move. The other white men—who had been just as dismayed at
the truth of Brown’s identity—now insisted that Brown dine with them. They ostracized the
prejudiced passenger instead of upholding racial separation.
An abolitionist newspaper, The New Jersey Freeman, recounted Brown’s tale as an
incident of “colorphobia.” Editor John Grimes claimed that the white men involved suffered an
abrupt occurrence of colorphobia upon the revelation of Brown’s racial identity. Grimes mocked
the ostracized white northerner, whose morality and sense of equality were corrupt, by calling
him Mr. Southern Chivalry. Northern whites like Mr. Southern Chivalry, Grimes implied, were
racially prejudiced and had no more kindness or sense of justice than a slave owner. Yet all was
not lost. Brown’s tale suggested antidotes to colorphobia. In Brown’s case, all but one of the
white passengers accepted his presence after Brown’s fortitude at the breakfast table. Brown’s
resistance proved him a worthy equal and cured, at least momentarily, the others’ colorphobia.
1
"Colorphobia," The New Jersey Freeman, Sep. 1, 1844.
1
In the decades before the Civil War, stories like these regularly appeared in the pages of
abolitionist newspapers and magazines. They revealed the vital second prong of the abolitionist
reform agenda—the eradication of racial prejudice. Alongside the mission to end chattel slavery,
abolitionists sought to defeat the prejudice that they claimed undergirded slavery and relegated
free black Americans to a perpetual status as second-class citizens. This was especially
troublesome in the free North following emancipation where the growing black population faced
not only segregated accommodations and color-sensitive businesses, but also struggled for equal
rights and fair treatment in public space. Some black northerners faced verbal insults while
others were physically accosted. Major black abolitionists like Frederick Douglass, William
Cooper Nell, and William Wells Brown were chief among those baffled by such treatment. Why
were black men, women, and children in the free North, they asked, kept from enjoying the
cherished American values of democracy, liberty, and equality?
Abolitionists sought to eradicate prejudice through a variety of means, but essential to
their effort was their increasing tendency to describe prejudice as “colorphobia.” But what was
colorphobia? To abolitionists, it was the irrational fear of black people that most of white
northerners labored under. With the concept of racism yet established in the American lexicon,
colorphobia allowed abolitionists to encapsulate all issues surrounding racially prejudiced
treatment of black Americans. Whether a white person refused seating to a black person on a
railroad car or confronted them in the street, abolitionists classified and indicted such actions as
evidence of colorphobia.
But more than just a fear, colorphobia was a disease that corrupted the minds and bodies
of white Americans. Whenever a person with colorphobia came in contact with a black
individual they suffered uncontrollable outbursts and irrational hate. Public bouts of insanity and
2
irrationality supplied abolitionists with a justification for presenting white people in reports as
inept, unfair, mentally unhinged, and immoral as they suffered from colorphobia’s cruelty.
Colorphobia also brought forth physical symptoms as well—convulsions, shouting, teeth
clenching, and loss of muscle control. By framing racial prejudice as abnormal, abolitionists
normalized racial equality as the natural condition by which humanity should operate. Grimes
used Brown’s experience to show the effect of colorphobia and how it strained relations between
the white and black populations. Humans should naturally cooperate and live amongst one
another, like when the white men had Brown sit with them, but instead Grimes thought
colorphobia upset the natural order of things and complicated social relations. Colorphobia
armed abolitionists with a new and compelling argument against prejudice.
This thesis explores abolitionist deployment of colorphobia and its impact on the politics
of reform in antebellum America. It argues that abolitionists adopted colorphobia to encourage
racial and social reform beginning in the mid-1830s and to promote black equality. It also argues
that abolitionists used disease and its variations, such as illness or malady, as a powerful reform
tactic, because of rampant fears of disease and popular understandings of disease during the
nineteenth-century. Abolitionists used disease and the disease concept of prejudice because it
suggested a cure. Just like Americans searched for a preventative and cure for diseases, like
cholera and hydrophobia, abolitionists thought colorphobia would elicit the same response and
persuade white Americans into changing their prejudiced ways.
In the early 1800s germ theory did not yet exist. The theory would later be widely
accepted in the latter part of the century, but before it could, disease comprehension had to
advance. In the 1830s when the first uses of colorphobia appeared, epidemics of cholera,
tuberculosis, yellow fever, and rabies (also known as hydrophobia) swept American cities.
3
Disease was thought to be a punishment for immorality dictated by the hands of God. Citizens
believed these diseases targeted the poor and immoral, because fewer from the middle and upper
classes contracted the illnesses.2 With abolitionists viewing racial prejudice as part of moral
failing, they depicted it as a disease in their reform agenda.
By the 1840s and 1850s more Americans believed environmental and social surroundings
caused disease, and abolitionists viewed colorphobia as something that also originated from a
racially structured social environment. Fear of contracting disease from its stigmas regarding
morality, lack of wealth, race, and high death rates spurred Americans to search for cures and
change how they lived in order to avoid contagion.3 Disease’s impact on society and reactions to
outbreaks influenced abolitionists into crafting racial prejudice into a disease. Abolitionists
believed framing racial prejudice as a disease would bring better attention to immediate
emancipation and equal rights. Racial prejudice would be taken much more seriously, and the
disease concept as a reform agent would hopefully bring social change.
In order to avoid social and moral demise, abolitionists crafted three tactics for ending
colorphobia and its spread. The successful combination of tactics would eradicate it. Adoption of
abolition and equal rights by northern whites served as the first tactic. By ending slavery
completely, the unusual institution would no longer influence the North with its need for racial
hierarchy. Equal rights would guarantee public space free from colorphobic fits. If all people
were viewed as equals by society no white person would suffer outbursts of indignation at a
black person sitting beside them at the theater. Adopting abolition guaranteed instilled values
that combated racially prejudiced thoughts, views, and actions while the establishment of equal
rights prevented hostile situations. Black abolitionists especially encouraged the second reform
2
Gerald Grob, The Deadly Truth: A History of Disease in America (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 2005).
3
Ibid.
4
tactic—black activism. Black activism became crucial for gaining support for immediate
emancipation and equal rights. Abolitionists like Douglass believed that the free black
population itself was instrumental in ending white racial prejudice. Without black people
challenging white authority and segregated public spaces there would be no change. Northern
black people must actively clash with the status quo and assert their authority, much like Brown
did against Mr. Southern Chivalry, and claim rights guaranteed to all those born in America. The
third and final tactic dealt with prevention. Abolitionists believed preventative steps taken with
children could stop colorphobia from forming in the new generation. Theoretically, education
about abolitionism and slavery would instill moral and anti-slavery values into children that
would follow them into adulthood. Also by exposing white children to black children in
classroom environments from an early age would establish a mindset that black persons were no
different than them, and deserved equal treatment and opportunities. Abolition, black activism,
and childrearing all were proposed as effective treatments for colorphobia.
While abolitionists used colorphobia for promoting anti-slavery and pro-equality values,
anti-abolitionists countered the attack on racial hierarchy and white supremacy with the adoption
of the notion of “negrophobia.” Originally, abolitionists used negrophobia as a synonym for
colorphobia, but by 1839, many racially prejudiced Americans had turned the term on its head.
Even though both terms embodied racial prejudice against the black population, anti-abolitionists
seized negrophobia and used it as a defense mechanism. Negrophobia came to be predominantly
known as the disease of abolition. Anti-abolitionists thought abolitionists were so obsessed over
ending slavery and upsetting the natural hierarchical order that they suffered from “negro on the
brain” or “negromania.” Like those infected with hydrophobia, negrophobics were mad; but
instead of being infected with rabies they fell victim to anti-slavery and equality views. Anti-
5
abolitionists feared the spread of negrophobia and the consequences of white society adopting
abolitionist values. By framing abolitionists as diseased and mentally imbalanced, antiabolitionists hoped racial dominancy and separate social spheres in the North would remain. The
use of negrophobia in anti-abolitionist writings also revealed white anxieties over the future of a
mixed-race and equal America. Anti-abolitionists believed shaping negrophobia to their own
needs would counter arguments for emancipation, equality, and black social betterment.
Abolitionist and anti-abolitionist battles over prejudice attracted attention from across the
Atlantic Ocean and drew Britain into the fight against colorphobia. British transatlantic travelers
noticed colorphobia while in the United States, and viewed the disease as specifically and
uniquely American. British abolitionists claimed their country was free from colorphobia, and
traveler reports and commentary on racially prejudiced instances given by British abolitionists
helped American abolitionists promote anti-slavery, immediate emancipation, and equality in the
United States. Canada also joined the battle against racial prejudice as colorphobia appeared in
provinces. As runaway slaves and free blacks moved to Canada so did white Americans. With
burgeoning black populations and American influence Canadians experienced intense racial
prejudice for the first time. Black Canadian newspapers reported on colorphobic incidents and
warned citizens about the damaging disease. What is most important about Canadian colorphobia
is that it disproves European claims that colorphobia only existed in America, and further
strengthens the abolitionist argument about how social and environmental surroundings spurred
the development of racial prejudice.
*****
This study of colorphobia contributes to three scholarly conversations: abolitionism and
reform politics; nineteenth-century disease; and race and racism. Historians have traced the roots
6
of abolitionism, its rise in popularity and support amongst specific groups of Americans, the
fragmentation of the reform crusade, and the movement’s impact on political and social life
throughout the United States.4 My thesis supplies new insight into the radical abolitionist reform
agenda by exposing the creation and politicization of a disease due to the internal split in the
American Anti-Slavery Society. Examining colorphobia in abolitionist writing changes the way
historians understand abolitionist reform tactics, including how abolitionists used the social
climate to bolster their arguments for immediate emancipation and equal rights. Scholars have
amply described the tactics of persuasion—moral suasion—that abolitionists used to push for
emancipation. Moral suasion was used to try and convince people to be better Christians by not
being racially prejudiced. Racial prejudice, abolitionists thought, would keep Americans out of
Heaven. Abolitionists argued that colorphobia pervaded churches throughout northern society,
and that Christians could cure themselves of it if their congregations altered their views and
adopted anti-slavery sentiments. However, colorphobia reveals another side to the moral suasion
tactic—fear of disease. Inclusion of colorphobic church instances and reports displays how
radical abolitionists revealed the hypocrisy of American Protestantism, while simultaneously
arguing for racial equality on the premise of disease instead of just morality.
Historians also have not focused on the role medicalized ideas played in the abolitionist
arsenal. Revealing the centrality of colorphobia to the reform agenda will change how historians
view the intellectual argument over race, demonstrate how disease theory advanced the desires of
a small group of individuals, and illustrate how colorphobia played a central role in emancipation
and equal rights. Historians have already figured out what disease was and how it was defined in
4
For examples of abolitionist scholarship, see James Oakes, The Radical and the Republican: Frederick
Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the Triumph of Antislavery Politics (New York: W.W. Norton &
Company, 2007); James Brewer Stewart, Holy Warriors: The Abolitionists and American Slavery (New
York: Hill and Wang, 1996); Kyle G. Volk, Moral Minorities and the Making of American Democracy
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2014).
7
the 1800s. This thesis takes those understandings and explores the logic of colorphobia being
presented as a disease by abolitionists through comparisons to other diseases and disease
knowledge of the time. Colorphobia adhered to nineteenth-century understandings of disease
before the discovery of germ theory. In the dominant view of the era, disease typically occurred
because of lifestyle and morality. Like cholera and hydrophobia, colorphobia did not
discriminate in whom it manifested contrary to popular disease beliefs. Poor, rich, non-slave
holding whites and slave-holding whites alike suffered.5 This thesis explores how abolitionists
contended that colorphobia originated in immorality, but also came from social and
environmental causes like other diseases. Radical abolitionists used the fears and stigmas of
disease to advance their reform agenda.
While colorphobia was categorized and used as a disease, it was also a phobia. The term
“phobia” means “a persisting fear of an object or of an idea which does not ordinarily justify
fear.”6 Phobias were accepted as a mental issue in psychiatric literature in the mid-nineteenth
century, which made colorphobia more legitimate in the public sphere after it had been in use by
abolitionists for a few decades. What really stands out about colorphobia is that unlike doctors
5
For examples of disease history, see Gerald Grob, The Deadly Truth: A History of Disease in America
(Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2005); Grob, The Mad Among Us: A History of the Care of
America’s Mentally Ill (USA: Free Press, 2011); James Denny Guillory, “The Pro-Slavery Arguments of
Dr. Samuel A. Cartwright,” Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association 9, no.
3 (1968). 209-227; Matthew Warner Osborn, Rum Maniacs: Alcoholic Insanity in the Early American
Republic (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014); John G. Robertson, An Excess of Phobias and
Manias: A Compilation of Anxieties, Obsessions, and Compulsions That Push Many over the Edge of
Sanity (Los Angeles: Senior Scribe Publications, 2003); Charles E. Rosenberg, The Cholera Years: The
United States in 1832, 1849 and 1886 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962); Todd L. Savitt, “The
Use of Blacks for Medical Experimentation and Demonstration in the Old South.” Southern Historical
Association 48, no. 3 (1982): 331-348; Marie Jenkins Schwartz, Birthing a Slave: Motherhood and
Medicine in the Antebellum South (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2006); John C. Waller,
Health and Wellness in 19th-Century America (Santa Barbara: Greenwood, 2014); Marli Frances Weiner
and Mazie Hough, Sex, Sickness, and Slavery Illness in the Antebellum South (Urbana: University of
Illinois Press, 2012).
6
Paul Errera, M.D., “Some Historical Aspects of the Concept, Phobia,” The Psychiatric Quarterly, 36,
no. 1-4 (1962): 325-336. 325.
8
and medical board members who looked at containing and preventing disease, radical
abolitionists looked at preventing and curing colorphobia through widespread adoption of
abolition and early disease prevention in childhood. Radical abolitionists framed colorphobia as
a mental disease with physical and emotional symptoms and outbursts. Before germ theory,
radical abolitionists claimed to find the cause of a specific “disease,” and how to prevent and
cure it. In a sense, abolitionists became doctors of morality.
This thesis also examines colorphobia within race and racism literature. Historians have
already looked at how white people and black people viewed one another and general reactions
to different races. Free blacks and black abolitionists viewed their relationship to white persons
differently and held different views on white people in general than did enslaved blacks.7 The
addition of colorphobia in race and racism literature exposes a new dimension in racial attitudes,
and self-empowerment and advancement through reform. By adding colorphobia to the
historiography of race and racism, this thesis pushes past already known notions about race and
racial prejudice, and brings in disease as something that actively shaped social standards and
notions involving race.
*****
This project consists of an introduction, three chapters, and an epilogue. The first chapter
is titled “Adopting Colorphobia,” and explains the logic of framing racial prejudice as a disease
by exploring its origins and legitimation. The chapter reveals that two main reasons made the
7
For examples of racial and racism histories, see Mia Bay, The White Image in the Black Mind: African
American Ideas about White People, 1830-1925 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000); John
Stauffer, The Black Hearts of Men: Radical Abolitionists and the Transformation of Race (Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2004); Ann Fabian, The Skull Collectors: Race, Science, and America’s
Unburied Dead (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010); George M. Frederickson, The Black Image
in the White Mind: The Debate on Afro-American Character and Destiny, 1817-1914 (New York City:
Harper & Row, 1971); Paul Goodman, Of One Blood: Abolitionism and the Origins of Racial Equality
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2000).
9
adoption of colorphobia possible. The first reason resided within the abolitionist movement itself
and its internal split that led to more radical ways of approaching agenda reform, and the second
stemmed from fears and anxieties over disease in a rapidly expanding urban and mixed-race
environment. The first section of the chapter deals with abolitionism and the atmosphere of the
North. Why did the Anti-Slavery Society split and what did the split mean for reform? Why did
the black population boom and what were the consequences? The second section situates
colorphobia within the medical ethos of the era. Specifically, mental illness, phobias, and
epidemic diseases are explored that showed similarities to colorphobia. Why did people fear
disease? Why did colorphobia mirror already established diseases? Following disease will be a
third and final section focused on abolitionist thoughts on children and preventing colorphobia in
the youth. The first chapter explains the foundations, creation, justification, and general workings
of colorphobia.
The second chapter, “Deploying Colorphobia,” explores the politics of colorphobia. How
did abolitionists deploy colorphobia? What parts of public space did abolitionists critique? The
chapter explores various areas of American life impacted by colorphobia, how abolitionists
encouraged reform, and how they hoped to bring about black advancement. “Impact of
Colorphobia” serves as the final chapter. It explores the divergent reactions anti-abolitionists and
transnational abolitionists had to American abolitionist use of colorphobia. Was there backlash,
resistance, opposition, or praise over its use? The first part of the chapter exposes how antiabolitionists countered colorphobia by adopting negrophobia for justifying racial prejudice and
hierarchy. It also explores anti-abolitionist anxieties about the future of America through antiabolitionist social commentary on the black population. The second part of the chapter looks at
10
how British abolitionists joined forces with northern abolitionists to cure America and spread
racial equality, and also how Canada denounced and feared the appearance of racial prejudice.
Finally, the epilogue addresses the fate of colorphobia during and after the Age of
Emancipation. The concept of colorphobia persisted into the 20th century, showing that some
Americans clung to the disease model of prejudice. By 1891, The Christian Recorder noted that
colorphobia was “the most poisonous of all diseases of mind or body, for it reaches the heart said
to be sanctified, and changes his love for man and hatred.”8 Newspapers and journalists
continued using colorphobia and negrophobia leading up to 1940. The epilogue questions what
happened to colorphobia once the term disappeared from print and hints at its impact.
8
“COLORPHOBIA…,” The Christian Recorder, Jun. 18, 1891.
11
Chapter 1
Adopting Colorphobia
In 1842 a black man named Frederick Douglass, covered in dust and weary of travel,
climbed down from the top of a carriage in Pittsfield, New Hampshire. Not allowed to travel
inside of carriages, he arrived at his host’s home with an unkempt appearance. The
Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society sent Douglass to Pittsfield for a Sunday meeting. The
Society guaranteed him lodging with a Mr. Hilles for his visit, but upon arrival he found himself
unwelcomed in both the surrounding area and Hilles’ home. White people predominantly
populated the neighborhood, and his presence drew immediate attention that reflected poorly on
the Hilles Family. Douglass also found the reactions of his hosts worrisome. Mr. Hilles barely
spoke a word, and his face contorted into an expression of uncertainty upon receiving him. Mrs.
Hilles greeted him formally but kept her distance. The behavior of his hosts drastically differed
from usual supporters of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society. Douglass declared, “When teatime came, I found that Mr. Hilles had lost his appetite and could not come to the table. I
suspected his trouble was colorphobia, and, though I regretted his malady, I knew his case was
not necessarily dangerous; and I was not without some confidence in my skill and ability in
healing diseases of that type.”9 Although Douglass claimed he remained unaffected by Mr.
Hilles’ reaction, he barely ate the desserts presented and mainly kept to himself during his stay.
While Douglass remained unscathed by the malady, he still dealt with its ramifications.
More than just anti-slavery and immediate emancipation occupied abolitionist attention in
nineteenth-century America. Racial prejudice and equal rights also became central issues as the
free black population expanded in the North and racial tensions flared. Prejudice narratives and
9
Frederick Douglass, The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass (Massachusetts: Digital Scanning Inc.,
2001), 555.
12
incident reports circulated orally throughout abolitionist meetings and plastered endless pages of
newspapers. Abolitionists continuously discussed and condemned racial prejudice towards the
black population and started referring to it as “colorphobia.” The term emerged during the mid1830s, and its use expanded beginning in the 1840s. The rise of colorphobia in abolitionist
vocabulary elicits various questions, some of which are: How did racially prejudiced incidents
become referred to as “colorphobia?” What about American society made disease a useful tool
for encouraging social reform? This chapter attempts to answer these questions while exploring
the roots of colorphobia.
This chapter argues that radical abolitionists adopted colorphobia for two reasons. The
first reason stems from the split in the American Anti-Slavery Society in 1840. Arguments over
reform tactics contributed to the split amongst abolitionists. Conservative abolitionists that
believed in gradual emancipation wanted to continue with moral suasion. The more radical
abolitionists that sought immediate emancipation and equal rights wanted to try new reform
measures—colorphobia being one of them. The split allowed for radical abolitionists to
implement the use of colorphobia on a larger scale. The second reason involves the country’s
social and physical environment. Framing racial prejudice as a disease occurred during a time of
rapidly expanding black populations in northern cities that challenged white dominance and
racial hierarchy. White people worried about the future of northern society because of these
challenges. Also, widespread epidemics broke out as populations soared, and brought immense
fear of illness and its consequences. The combination of increasing black populations and
epidemics presented radical abolitionists with the perfect opportunity to convincingly frame
racial prejudice as a white disease that caused irrational fear of black people and encompassed all
acts of prejudice. Disagreements amongst abolitionists, social tensions, and fears of illness all
13
played a part in the adoption of colorphobia. Once racial prejudice was framed as a disease,
abolitionists sought to prevent colorphobia from infecting and spreading throughout the youth by
teaching students about the dangers of slavery and the wrongs of racial prejudice.
Writing About Racial Prejudice Before Colorphobia
On August 27, 1830, citizens found the body of radical abolitionist David Walker outside
his second-hand clothing store in Boston, Massachusetts. One year earlier Walker had published
his Appeal to the Coloured Citizens of the World. His Appeal, a radical pamphlet focused on
rebellion and racial prejudice, caused widespread uproar in the United States. Walker’s writing
became so incendiary that a $3,000 reward for his death, and a $10,000 reward for kidnapping
and bringing him to the South hung over his head.10 Debates over the cause of Walker’s death
quickly followed the discovery of his body, and two plausible options emerged. Some Americans
believed Walker died from lung fever like his daughter, while others in the local black
community believed someone poisoned him over his radical views. Historians continue to debate
Walker’s death, and some believe in the possibility of foul play.11 What is clear, however, is that
the publication of Walker’s Appeal sparked arguments over slavery and spread fear of slave
revolts throughout the white population.12
Walker called for slaves to rebel, even murderously, against their masters and enslavers.
Doing so provoked widespread fear throughout the white population. Other than rebellion and
violent insurrections, Walker wrote on topics including American Christianity, morality, and
black stereotypes. The most important part of his Appeal is arguably Walker’s views on white
racial prejudice, and how to counteract it with black empowerment and pride. According to
Sean Wilentz, “New Introduction,” Appeal to the Coloured Citizens of the World, but in particular, and
very expressly, to those of The United States of America (New York: Hill and Wang, 1995), xix.
11
Charles Wiltse, "Introduction," Appeal to the Coloured Citizens of the World, but in particular, and
very expressly, to those of The United States of America (New York: Hill and Wang, 1965). xi.
12
Ibid., vii.
10
14
Walker, racial prejudice plagued the entirety of nineteenth-century American society, and it
stemmed from the allure of power and American Christianity. Walker wrote, “The whites have
always been an unjust, jealous, unmerciful, avaricious and blood-thirsty set of beings, always
seeking after power and authority.”13 As a consequence, Christianity in America transformed
into a tool that supported the barbaric treatment and enslavement of black people, and prejudice
followed the implementation of white power. Walker continued, “It is a notorious fact that the
major part of the white Americans, have, ever since we have been among them, tried to keep us
ignorant, and make us believe that God made us and our children to be slaves to them and
theirs.”14 Only by seeking true Christianity and redemption could white Americans end racial
prejudice. But why would they if it did not benefit them?
The only true hope for the end of slavery and racial prejudice resided within the black
population. Walker encouraged action by instructing slaves to rise up violently against their
masters but to also seek an education. He declared, “You have to prove to the Americans and the
world, that we are MEN, and not brutes, as we have been represented, and by millions treated.
Remember, to let the aim of your labours among your brethren, and particularly the youths, be
the dissemination of education and religion.”15 Fighting ignorance through reading, writing, and
thinking became tools for black rebuttal against claims of inferiority.
Walker’s encouragement of violent radicalism drew public response and condemnations
from other abolitionists. William Lloyd Garrison, arguably the most famous white abolitionist of
his time, condemned Walker in the first issue of his newspaper The Liberator. Garrison wrote:
Believing, as we do, that men should never do evil that good may
come; that a good end does not justify wicked means in the
13
David Walker, Appeal to the Coloured Citizens of the World, but in particular, and very expressly, to
those of The United States of America (Boston: Revised and Published by David Walker, 1829), 20.
14
Ibid., 33.
15
Ibid., 35.
15
accomplishment of it; and that we ought to suffer, as did our Lord
and his apostles, unresistingly -- knowing that vengeance belongs
to God, and he will certainly repay it where it is due; -- believing
all this, and that the Almighty will deliver the oppressed in a way
which whey know not, we deprecate the spirit and tendency of this
Appeal.16
Dismayed at the damage Walker may have caused for the abolitionist movement,
Garrison quickly assured the American public that Walker held too violent and radical views. He
continued, “We do not preach rebellion – no, but submission and peace. Our enemies may accuse
us of striving to stir up the slaves to revenge but their accusations are false, and made only to
excite the prejudices of the whites, and to destroy our influence.”17 While Garrison never
promoted violence, he eventually became a radical abolitionist in the sense that he denounced the
American Colonization Society, and promoted immediate emancipation and equal rights.
Three years after Walker’s Appeal, Garrison’s views on the American Colonization
Society and understanding of white racial prejudice appeared in a pamphlet entitled Thoughts on
African Colonization. The American Colonization Society privately raised funds for sending
freedmen back to Africa in the newly founded Liberia. Garrison thought the Society promoted
slavery and racial prejudice with its goal of black resettlement. According to Garrison, “the
Society is artfully based upon and defended by popular prejudice: it takes advantage of wicked
and preposterous opinions, and hence its success.”18 While the Society started on a moral
William Lloyd Garrison, “Editorial Regarding ‘Walker's Appeal’,” The Liberator, Jan. 8, 1831.
Ibid.
18
William Lloyd Garrison, Thoughts on African Colonization: Or an Impartial Exhibition of the
Doctrines, Principles and Purposes of the American Colonization Society. Together with the Resolutions,
Addresses and Remonstrances of the Free People of Color (Boston: Garrison and Knapp, 1832), 1.
16
17
16
mission, it turned anti-Christian and anti-republican. As a consequence it fostered further
enslavement and promoted racial prejudice.19
The Society adopted gradualism—or the practice of slowly ending slavery. But by
sending freedmen to Liberia, Garrison believed the value of those enslaved in America
increased. Colonization “is agreeable to slaveholders, because it is striving to remove a class of
person who they fear may stir up their slaves to rebellion; all who avow undying hostility to the
people of color are in favor of it; all who shrink from acknowledging them as brethren and
friends, or who make them a distinct and inferior caste, or who deny the possibility of elevating
them in the scale if improvement here, most heartily embrace it.”20 In Garrison’s opinion,
prejudice stemmed from the institution of slavery and a society where anti-Christian and antiRepublican individuals and groups ensured racial hierarchy.
One year after Garrison published his pamphlet, Lydia Maria Child denounced slavery
and rebuked racial prejudice in An Appeal in Favor of That Class of Americans Called Africans.
Like Garrison, Child condemned the American Colonization Society. Child wrote, “I object to
the Colonization Society, because it tends to put public opinion asleep, on a subject where it
needs to be wide awake.”21 Instead of the Society having ruthlessly condemned slavery and
racial prejudice, it carefully avoided offending pro-slavery individuals and their way of life by
ensuring the existence of slavery by removing only the free black population. Colonizationists, in
Child’s opinion, thought racial prejudice to be a natural phenomenon and unalterable.22 Child
believed instead that racial prejudice could be refuted through countering common black
stereotypes.
19
Ibid., 20-21.
Ibid., 21.
21
Lydia Maria Child, An Appeal in Favor of That Class of Americans Called Africans (Boston: Allen &
Ticknor, 1833), 126.
22
Ibid., 133.
20
17
Child believed the stereotype of the “intellectually inferior Negro” provided an excuse for
white prejudice.23 Educating the black population would make them great additions to society,
and through self-advancement they would defeat stereotypes and racial prejudice.24 In Child’s
opinion, racial prejudice stemmed from slavery itself, the belief that racial prejudice occurred
naturally, and black stereotypes. The only cure for racial prejudice originated in black education
and advancement.
The three writings of Walker, Garrison, and Child were only the beginning of
abolitionists making sense of white racial prejudice and searching for its cure in the North. As a
consequence of growing prejudice against black persons, the question of what prompted white
racial prejudice and how to successfully abolish it from society plagued abolitionists for decades.
Beginning in the mid-1830s, abolitionists adopted colorphobia as a new reform tactic for
encouraging white northern society into ending racial prejudice, while simultaneously bringing
about immediate emancipation, equal rights, and advancement for the black population.
Abolitionism & Abolitionists
Abolitionists like Walker, Garrison, and Child drove conversations on white racial
prejudice in the early 1830s, but who were abolitionists? Abolitionists found slavery immoral
and sought its end, and black and white men and women joined anti-slavery movements. The
origins of abolitionism in the United States stemmed from the Second Great Awakening and the
rise of white evangelicals in the nineteenth-century.25 According to evangelical values and
23
Ibid., 148.
Ibid., 131.
25
For more information on the rise of the abolitionist movement, see James Oakes, The Radical and the
Republican: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the Triumph of Antislavery Politics (New York:
W.W. Norton & Company, 2007); Kyle G. Volk, Moral Minorities and the Making of American
Democracy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014); Dorothy Sterling, Ahead of Her Time: Abby
Kelley and The Politics of Antislavery (New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1991);
24
18
outlooks, the continual increase of the market economy created distasteful standards of living
and morals amongst northerners as they partook in self-indulgence.26 These white evangelicals
viewed the state of their country with disdain, and sought social reform over moral imperfections
like slavery. Religious young men and women partook in new opportunities for engaging in
social activism and combating moral degradation, which attracted many who would eventually
become some of the leading figures of abolitionism. Historian Aileen S. Kraditor dates the
beginning of abolitionism in America as January 1, 1831 with the first issue of William Lloyd
Garrison’s newspaper The Liberator. Two years later Garrison and Arthur Tappan founded the
American Anti-Slavery Society that fueled the movement’s growth.27
Still a minority group in the North by the late 1830s, abolitionists faced criticism and
violent attacks by northerners, or anti-abolitionists, looking to keep racial hierarchy. These
outside pressures forced a revaluation of their primary use of moral suasion as a reform tactic,
and some abolitionists thought challenging northern white racial prejudice seemed important
while others disagreed. By 1840, the Anti-Slavery Society had indefinitely split over arguments
involving politics and reform. Facing irreconcilable differences, the abolitionist movement
fractured into gradualists and radicals. Conservative or gradualist abolitionists sought gradual
emancipation and financial compensation for slave owners, and believed the return of moral
northern values would occur once slavery ended. Immediatists or radical abolitionists sought
immediate emancipation and equal rights for black persons without compensation for
slaveholders. Radicals also thought immorality plagued the North and that it needed massive
Richard S. Newman, The Transformation of American Abolitionism (Chapel Hill: University of North
Carolina Press, 2002).
26
James Brewer Stewart, Holy Warriors: The Abolitionists and American Slavery (New York: Hill and
Wang, 1996), 35.
27
Aileen S. Kraditor, Means and Ends in American Abolitionism: Garrison and His Critics on Strategy
and Tactics, 1834-150 (Lanham: Ivan R. Dee; Reprint edition, 1989). 3, viii.
19
reform.28 The split allowed for conservatives and radicals to combat slavery however they saw
fit. Radicals moved past focusing on just slavery, and launched an attack on northern racial
prejudice by increasing the use of colorphobia in their reform agenda. Without the split,
colorphobia would not have become such a popular reform tool or appeared as often as it did in
the abolitionist press.
Northern Social Climate:
Urbanization and Racial Issues
The northern social climate demanded immediate attention from abolitionists. Full
abolition across northern states remained a slow process, but complete northern emancipation
occurred by 1830. With the North finally established as firmly anti-slavery, free blacks settled
throughout states like New York and Massachusetts. As a consequence the free black population
soared. In 1790, the free black population in the North stood at 27,000. By 1830, however, the
population grew to 130,000.29 This growth brought legal and social consequences, such as
“Black Laws” that restricted black settlement and freedom of movement, as the white
population interacted with black men, women, and children more frequently in public space.30
Northern whites even promoted excluding black people from public accommodations and tried
limiting interaction between races.
They were either excluded from railway cars, omnibuses,
stagecoaches, and steamboats or assigned to special ‘Jim Crow’
sections; they sat, when permitted, in secluded and remote corners
of theaters and lecture halls; they could not enter most hotels,
28
Aileen S. Kraditor, Means and Ends in American Abolitionism: Garrison and His Critics on Strategy
and Tactics, 1834-150, 8.
29
Alton Hornsby, Jr. and Susan Cianci Salvatore, Civil Rights in America: Racial Desegregation of
Public Accommodations (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, 2004), 6; Ira Berlin, Slaves
Without Masters: The Free Negro in the Antebellum South (New York: Pantheon Books, 1974), 46-49;
Leon F. Litwack, North of Slavery: The Free Negro in the United States, 1790-1860 (Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1961), 14.
30
Kyle G. Volk, Moral Minorities and the Making of American Democracy (New York: Oxford
University Press, 2014), 104.
20
restaurants, and resorts, except as servants; they prayed in “Negro
pews” in the white churches. . . . Moreover, they were often
educated in segregated schools, punished in segregated prisons,
nursed in segregated hospitals, and buried in segregated
cemeteries.31
In this racially charged atmosphere abolitionists questioned why white people treated the
free black population so poorly. Radical abolitionists witnessed white reactions towards black
individuals in public space on a daily basis, and decided that the white population suffered from
racial prejudice. But what was prejudice in the 1800s? The Atheneum; or, Spirit of the English
Magazines, a monthly magazine published in Boston that supplied commentary on all things
regarding literature and science, gave an explanation for prejudice. “Prejudice, in its ordinary and
literal sense, is prejudging any question without having sufficiently examining it, and adhering to
our opinion upon it through ignorance, malice, or perversity, in spite of every evidence to the
contrary.”32 According to the magazine, individuals turn stubborn and remain closed-off through
personal assumptions that create bias and prejudice. Based on the definition of prejudice,
abolitionists viewed racial prejudice as the irrational and close-minded response to the black
population based on skin color and preconceived notions of race.
Typically, prejudice and racial prejudice appeared interchangeably in newspapers
throughout the 1830s and beyond. Even once the use of colorphobia became popular,
abolitionists used prejudice or racial prejudice in articles dealing with the disease. Opinions and
definitions of racial prejudice filled pages, and sometimes prejudice narratives followed the
author’s opening statements on the phenomenon. For example, Rev. Cyrus P. Grosvenor, the
editor of a Baptist newspaper called The Christian Reflector, viewed prejudice as an irrational
part of mankind and questioned:
31
Leon F. Litwack, North of Slavery: The Free Negro in the United States, 1790-1860, 97.
“AN ANALYSIS OF PREJUDICE,” The Atheneum; or, Spirit of the English Magazines (Boston: John
Cotton, Jun. 1830).
32
21
Is not a prejudice a feeling for which we cannot give a satisfactory
reason, or for which we are ashamed to give any reason? Are not
prejudices unphilosophical, and should a rational mind indulge
them? Are not prejudices unchristian, and should not a Christian
perseveringly overcome them as marks of peculiar delicacy and
refinement?33
Grosvenor’s prejudice narrative that followed focused on a black married couple that
boarded a steamboat in New York. Although the husband happened to be a well-educated
clergyman, not one white person on the steamboat acknowledged their presence. According to
Grosvenor, the only crime he committed that day stemmed from having a “‘skin not colored like
our own,’ and he shrunk from those around him because he felt that he was considered a
nuisance, and they regarded him with cold and supercilious pride, or with bitter and sneering
contempt.”34 Daylight soon faded into darkness, and white travelers hurried inside as a
thunderous storm swept in. The husband sought the captain’s approval for his wife obtaining
passage in the women’s cabin for the duration of the storm, where women could enjoy one
another’s company without the presence of the opposite sex or their vices, but only laughter and
the cruel reality that “the ladies want no negroes in there” were given as a response.35 After
spending the night in the storm the couple had taken ill. The husband recovered but his wife
perished. “And among the many sad and bitter thoughts which crowded upon his mind, as he
recalled his blighted hopes, his disappointed expectations, not one was more agonizing than this,
to use his own expression, —that it was prejudice which murdered his wife.”36
Defining racial prejudice and displaying examples such as Grosvenor’s in abolitionist
writings continued well past the 1830s. However, more than just the expanding free black
population influenced the concentration on racial prejudice. The first black newspaper
Rev. Cyrus P. Grosvenor, “PREJUDICE,” The Christian Reflector, Jan. 25, 1839.
Ibid.
35
Ibid.
36
Ibid.
33
34
22
established in New York in 1827 became a vocal source for immediate emancipation, equal
rights, and black advancement. Freedom’s Journal, founded by Rev. Peter Williams, Jr. and
other free black men, set the stage “in the development of black consciousness and
organization.”37 The rallying cry of free blacks for immediate emancipation and equal rights
convinced some gradualists into adopting immediatism. Garrison, for example, “left Baltimore a
changed man” after interacting with the free black community while on a visit and adopted
radicalized abolitionism.38 After seeing black passion for anti-slavery and equality, Garrison and
other white abolitionists fought for immediate emancipation and equal rights.
Why Adopt Disease?
While northern society became more racially contested from the growing free population
and the segregation policies that followed, and abolitionists sought racial prejudice reform, the
unhealthy environment of the urban North served as the perfect atmosphere for the spread of
disease and devastating epidemics. Due to the new market economy and increasing foreign trade,
the North became overpopulated and industrialized. People lived in close quarters in urban
communities, used the same public transportation and water wells, and found similar
employment along class and racial lines. As cities continued growing throughout the 1800s with
foreign immigration and a burgeoning black population disease ran rampant. Even though some
cities adopted regulations for dealing with public health concerns before the 1800s, disease
containment remained difficult.39 The higher the population, the harder supplying safe water
sources and removing wastes became. These problems challenged city governments. Even when
cities constructed sewers the systems “paradoxically increased mortality from some water-born
37
Paul Goodman, Of One Blood: Abolitionism and the Origins of Racial Equality (Berkeley and Los
Angeles: University of California Press, 2000), 24.
38
Ibid., 43.
39
Gerald Grob, The Deadly Truth: A History of Disease in America (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 2005). 97.
23
disease,” like typhoid fever.40 Yet most cities remained inactive regarding health concerns until
epidemics arrived and reeked havoc on citizens.
The first reason abolitionists used disease as a reform tool stemmed from 1800s medical
knowledge and ideas. New York City serves as a great example for depicting nineteenth-century
disease understandings. In 1832, public concern over cholera entering New York ports forced a
response from the NYC Board of Health. The board put quarantines into effect for the summer;
but with the Board wielding little to no actual power, nothing more got accomplished.41 Like
other urban areas, New York City fostered the perfect environment for an epidemic. Streets
stayed cramped and filthy, and cleaning them remained impossible. Water quality and quantity
became such a problem that the wealthy imported water from the country.42 Class conflict
erupted as the poor used city water pumps and struggled through filth, while the upper classes
supplied themselves with clean water, and kept away from poorer districts where immigrants,
freedmen, and disease more likely resided.
While lack of adequate water and general sanitation remained a large problem for those
living in the city, germ theory did not yet exist as of 1832. Instead, God punished moral failings
through illness and epidemics. Because of this, cholera became viewed as divine punishment.
God infected the impious and immoral through cholera as a way to “promote the cause of
righteousness, by sweeping away the obdurate and the incorrigible, and to drain off the filth and
scum which contaminate and defile human society.”43 Yet immorality and sin did not remain the
only reasons people contracted cholera—poverty also caused infection. Immigrants, the
intemperate, and idle brought disease upon themselves. Race also played a crucial role. White
40
Ibid., 187.
Charles E. Rosenberg, The Cholera Years: The United States in 1832, 1849 and 1886 (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1962), 19.
42
Ibid., 17-18.
43
Ibid., 43.
41
24
people believed black persons spread disease wherever they resided, because the character of the
black population, “lazy, careless in personal habits, ignorant temperament,” doomed them to
disease and mortality.44 The susceptibility of the black population to cholera appeared as proof of
“the deformity and gross stupidity of the Old Dominion’s labor system.”45
Cholera victimized black people. African Americans were doomed to a labor system
where they did not profit, move up in society, or experience much religious guidance. The white
population believed freedmen brought plagues to the North through a specific contagion; even
when medical experts concluded the cause of cholera lay in the atmosphere itself and that
cholera did not spread from person-to-person.46 When another cholera epidemic hit the city in
1849, not much had been done for improving sanitation, and neither had there been further
research on disease comprehension. Yet the belief that something specific caused cholera began
gathering more support even amongst the medical community.
Image 1: Map of the 1832 cholera epidemic in New York City created by Sonia
Shah, Dan McCarey, and the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting at the New
York Academy of Medicine.
44
Ibid., 60.
Ibid., 61.
46
Ibid., 75.
45
25
Seventeen years later when the final epidemic hit the city, “there were few physicians
who doubted that cholera was portable and transmissible.”47 In the years leading up to the
epidemic of 1866, the NYC Board of Health responded better to sanitation needs and funded
more medical research. Because of these preventative measures, cholera in 1866 proved less
disastrous. Although society grew closer to the acceptance of germ theory, many doctors still
struggled with the concept of contagion. Germ theory is the belief that specific diseases are
caused by microorganisms that attack a living organism, such as humans.48 The idea of the
“micro-organism” remained in its infant stage by 1866 but doctors agreed that cholera seemed
dictated by environment.49 Abolitionists framed colorphobia as being both immorally and
environmentally caused based off of evolving nineteenth-century medical knowledge.
The second reason abolitionists framed racial prejudice as an illness, is because
epidemics created immense fear of disease, or “nosemaphobia;” and fears swept American
society during and after outbreaks of deadly diseases.50 “When ‘abnormal epidemics appear at
irregular intervals and result in mortality spikes, public fears often reach a fever pitch. Under
these circumstances community life is disrupted, and often a search for explanation leads to the
stigmatization of socially marginal groups as the cause of the disease.”51 White people came in
contact with black people, a socially marginalized group, every day. As a result, disease stigmas
attached to freedmen made public space even more racially contested as epidemics flared. White
people feared contracting disease from not only the uncertainty of survival but also because of
47
Ibid., 195, 197.
For more information on germ theory, see Louis Pasteur’s Germ Theory and its Applications to
Medicine & on the Antiseptic Principle of the Practice of Surgery. Germ theory was hard to refute as
early as 1877, but was widely accepted in the medical realm by the 1880s.
49
Charles E. Rosenberg, The Cholera Years: The United States in 1832, 1849 and 1886, 198.
50
John G. Robertson, An Excess of Phobias and Manias: A Compilation of Anxieties, Obsessions, and
Compulsions That Push Many over the Edge of Sanity (Los Angeles: Senior Scribe Publications, 2003),
217.
51
Gerald Grob, The Deadly Truth: A History of Disease in America, 70.
48
26
the connotations. Disease comprehension slowly advanced beginning in the 1840s, but without
germ theory until the later decades of the 1800s the white North stayed fearful and distrusting of
the disease ridden black population. Freedmen were seen as natural disease carriers through
stigmatization and stereotypes, and new knowledge circulating over how disease spread became
part of why white people grew more obstinate and irrational towards freedmen in public space.
Even the name “colorphobia” itself held disease connotations. When abolitionists first
termed colorphobia, phobics were diagnosed as suffering from a medical condition. Doctors
define “phobia” as “a persisting fear of an object or of an idea which does not ordinarily justify
fear.”52 This meant that colorphobia was the irrational fear of (and even hatred towards) the
black population. The fear of black people induced irrational reactions towards all ages and
genders of freedmen. These reactions were accompanied by physical symptoms, such as
shouting, shaking, loss of muscle control, and public outbursts. A cure for colorphobia with it
continuously appearing throughout the North as a consequence of the growing free population
would help mitigate racial tensions. Frederick Douglass constantly wrote about northern
colorphobia and viewed it as a “perceptual disease which he described as ‘malignant,’ an
‘epidemic,’ and a ‘strange plague.’”53
Medicalized phobias were accepted as mental disorders in psychiatric literature in the
mid-nineteenth century, and colorphobia’s symptoms fit within the realm of mental disorders.
Mental illness originally only attracted medical attention if the afflicted displayed sudden or
offensive symptoms that were deemed dangerous.54 Bizarre or eccentric behaviors did not
qualify as mental illness—but if a person displayed disease symptoms, or seemed like a threat to
Paul Errera, M.D., “Some Historical Aspects of the Concept, Phobia,” The Psychiatric Quarterly 36, no.
1-4 (1962): 325-336. 325.
53
Samuel Otter, Philadelphia Stories: America’s Literature of Race and Freedom (Oxford University
Press, Mar. 24, 2010), 32.
54
Paul Errera, M.D., “Some Historical Aspects of the Concept, Phobia,” 326.
52
27
themselves or those around them, a doctor cared for them immediately. Like those with mental
illnesses, colorphobics displayed shameless outbursts and uncontrollable actions that mimicked
real diseases, such as cholera and rabies. While Americans feared physical disease and its
connotations, mental illness brought its own stigmas of safety concerns and immorality. Mental
health care dates back to the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in the United States. Over the
course of two centuries, family members cared for the mentally ill in small agrarian communities
with good supervision. Communities and families worried that mentally unstable individuals
would hurt themselves or others around them and would never successfully financially support
themselves.55 In the following century as northern society changed, mental illness turned into a
moral problem that the state addressed.
Agrarian styles of supervision and social awareness regarding mental illness unraveled
with northern industrialization. In a society already plagued by threats of industrial accidents or
deaths, and diseases like cholera, the mentally ill in overcrowded cities suddenly posed a very
real threat. The mentally deranged in large urban areas increased as populations grew, and
escaped from their homes and caretakers.56 Communal awareness in cities became practically
impossible as individuals and families moved for jobs and neighborhood populations
continuously fluxed. Caring for the mentally ill also became more complicated from shifting
family structures in urban settings. Family life turned privatized and separated from the public
sphere.57 The public threat of the mentally ill and shifting familial patterns spurred the creation
of non-familial care options run by states or private institutions.
Gerald Grob, The Mad Among Us: A History of the Care of America’s Mentally Ill (USA: Free Press,
2011), 5-6.
56
Ellen Holtzman, “A Home Away From Home,” American Psychological Association 43, no.3 (2012),
24.
57
Gerald Grob, The Mad Among Us: A History of the Care of America’s Mentally Ill, 24.
55
28
Growing demand for public safety combined with a growing sense of governmental
obligation for citizen care facilitated state-run public psychiatric asylums. Towards the end of the
nineteenth-century, doctors employed in asylums treated patients with mostly hydrotherapy and
rest, and “most physicians held a somatic view of mental illness and assumed that a defect in the
nervous system lay behind mental health problems.”58 Before doctors believed in the nervous
system defect, the popular belief of moral failings fueling mental health issues dominated public
discourse. To cure immorality that caused mental illness the implementation of “moral
management” quickly arose. Immorality sprang from environmental influences, just like racial
prejudice, and through placing an individual into asylum care morality might be reinstated. By
using physical disease and mental illness together, abolitionists encouraged fear of racial
prejudice and finding a cure.
Abolitionists actively critiqued and denounced racial prejudice during an era of
urbanization, racial tension, and epidemics. Radical abolitionists used the North’s racialized
atmosphere and diseased environment as the foundation for arguing for immediate emancipation,
equal rights, and black advancement. In a society plagued by nosemaphobia and mental illness,
disease seemed like the perfect tool for encouraging reform and alleviating racial issues. If
abolitionists asserted that the white population suffered from racial prejudice in the context of
disease, white society would theoretically fear contracting or already having it. Fear would even
spur an active search for a cure. Medicalizing racial prejudice turned the social norm problematic
for those who held racially prejudiced views, and produced conversations on emancipation and
northern reform.
Legitimating Colorphobia Through Other Diseases & Phobias:
Cholera & Choleraphobia
58
Ibid., 24.
29
Cholera paralleled colorphobia in various ways and helped legitimize colorphobia in the
public realm from the similarities. Not only did cholera spread across the country like
colorphobia where other diseases like yellow fever were absent, “the abrupt onset and fearful
symptoms of cholera made Americans apprehensive and reflective…”59 Just like colorphobia,
the appearance of cholera typically happened without warning, or with little to no previous
symptoms. However, symptoms differed from colorphobia, except sometimes a “colored or
pinched face.”60 With parallels between cholera and colorphobia in its depth and sudden onset,
real concern grew over the reach and consequences of colorphobia.
In 1850, Douglass published an article regarding cholera in Rochester, New York. Just a
year prior a new cholera epidemic broke out in New York City but Rochester miraculously
remained untouched. However lucky Rochester was for escaping the “ravages of cholera,”
inhabitants could not honestly claim full health with America’s “peculiarly national epidemic,
viz: ‘madness at color.’”61 Within the article Douglass used one of colorphobia’s alternative
names, “Black-phobia.” Douglass wanted to help readers of the North Star recognize those with
colorphobia by revealing three reasons for its difficult diagnosis:
First, then, the fact that a white man or woman is willing to be
waited upon at the dining table by a person of sable hue, does not
necessarily prove that the white man or white woman is free from
the loathsome disease denominated above as "black-phobia." By
some inexplicable relation subsisting between the two, the horrid
virus seems soothed rather than excited by the presence of black
persons in the act of serving white persons with food. So far from
objecting to being served by colored servants, our white fellowcitizens admit them to be among the most kind obliging and
attentive waiters in the world. In proof of this, we need only to
point to the fact that this class of persons may be found in the
vocations of servants and waiters on board of the most popular
59
Charles E. Rosenberg, The Cholera Years: The United States in 1832, 1849 and 1886, 3.
Ibid., 2.
61
Frederick Douglass, “The Black-phobia in Rochester,” The North Star, Oct. 3, 1850.
60
30
steamers and in the most fashionable hotels of the United States. This, therefore, is no test of the presence of the vile plague.62
Douglass’ second point about those with “black-phobia” tackled black servitude. White
people enjoyed being served by the black population, as it reassured them of their place in the
racial hierarchy. Black people serving and waiting on white people proved to “act as opiates, and
lull the black madness into serene repose, so that the disease is scarcely to be perceived by the
most experienced practitioners.”63 The third point tackled black hygiene and beautification
services. If a white man allowed a black barber to cut his hair and give him a shave, it did not
mean he lacked “black-phobia.” Instead, it merely meant white people enjoyed being “subserved
by men, no matter how black soever they be.”64 The only real way to test a man for “blackphobia” stemmed from witnessing how he acts with a black person outside of the service
industry or positions of subservience. Can he act kindly towards a black man and treat him
equally? If not, then he “has the seeds of the disease within him, and will only require a negrohating atmosphere about him to make him ‘a case’ at once.”65 Whereas those with cholera are
easy to spot and diagnose, individuals with colorphobia are difficult to find, because their disease
lurks beneath the surface, and only appears when provoked by specific situations and conditions
regarding racial confrontation and attempts at equality. The difficulty of spotting the disease
made colorphobia just as terrifying as cholera, if not more.
During the cholera epidemic of the 1830s an American tourist attended a sermon given at
a European church. The preacher delivered a lively sermon in which he announced cholera as the
disease sinners brought upon society and dictated by God Almighty. The American’s thoughts
62
Ibid.
Ibid.
64
Ibid.
65
Ibid.
63
31
reveal a critical view on the preacher’s understanding of disease, as well as views that deviated
from typical nineteenth-century opinions. He pondered:
The rich man might murder, rob, and ruin all around him—he was
perfectly safe from cholera. The poor man might be the most
virtuous, religious, industrious of his race—but poverty was the sin
that rendered him the sure victim of the epidemic! Such is the
species of justice with which MAN has dared to invest his
CREATOR! If cholera was sent by a supernatural power on earth,
as a scourge, and independent of natural causes—that power would
seem to have been EVIL, rather than GOOD; for imagination can
hardly conceive a visitation more partial and unjust, than the
pestilence in question.66
How could these contradictions exist in a society plagued by divine disease? The only
plausible explanation for cholera became that it originated in the worldly environment. Unlike
the American tourist in the 1830s, most people feared God’s cholera, and “the injudicious
orations from some of the pulpits gave an additional power of destructiveness to the epidemic.”67
Whether abroad or in the United States, terror and unadulterated fear plagued communities
waiting for the first signs of cholera. As a consequence of their nosemaphobia, another disease
emerged in communities just as deadly as cholera—“choleraphobia.”
Out of all diseases spreading that facilitated fear, cholera seemed one of the most
worrisome. Cholera spread throughout both the North and South, but with such a dense northern
population its catastrophic effects stuck out in urban communities. The first cholera epidemic in
1832 in New York City brought the deaths of fifty-two in one week, as reported by the Office of
the City Inspector.68 While some cities in New York were more ravaged than others, the city of
Troy miraculously remained unscathed. Elisha Cushman, editor of The Christian Secretary,
“CHOLERA-PHOBIA AND CHOLERA ECCLESIASTES,” The Medico-chirurgical Review and
Journal of Practical Medicine. New Series. Volume 20. (New York: Richard & George S. Wood, 1834),
456.
67
Ibid., 456.
68
Elisa Cushman, “HEALTH OF N. YORK,” Christian Secretary, Sept. 29, 1832.
66
32
relayed a report from Troy that claimed, “…Cholera has fled our borders long since. More
recently, the cholera-phobia has fled, also, and with it have departed listlessness, long faces,
vacant streets, and dull times.”69 The longer the threat of cholera stayed in cities the more fear of
catching it mounted. This fear created “choleraphobia.”
In the Boston Medical and Surgical Journal the following year, Dr. Tellier remarked on
disease being produced by fear. Tellier presented four cases of choleraphobia he witnessed and
his findings. The first case occurred in a district absent of cholera. It revolved around a nervous
woman who stressed over contracting the malady. Tellier put her on bed rest for a few days and
she recovered.70 But a couple days passed after her bed rest and she died of a violent attack of
cholera from nowhere. The second case regarded a man of strong character who suddenly took ill
from fear of cholera; but the next morning he awoke rested and healthy. The third case involved
a young chambermaid who self-diagnosed herself as suffering from cholera. In reality she merely
had a case of bowel irritability. The fourth case involved a woman who believed she had cholera
from having the shivers, and as a consequence of fear, her heart rate increased, her skin grew hot,
and as she struggled with breathing she perished at the age of thirty-five.71
These four cases as observed by Dr. Tellier reveal the anxiety of disease in the nation.
Fear, according to Tellier, “cannot produce the ‘blue cholera,’ but bring on a particular disease,
to which the name phobia (choleraphobia) may be given.”72 The threat of cholera in the United
States and the fear of contracting it spread. In 1833, Teller confirmed that cholera itself produced
a new disease known as choleraphobia. “The only known cause of this disease is fear; the
69
Ibid.
Dr. Tellier, “CHOLERAPHOBIA.: Cases of Choleraphobia; with Remarks on the Effects of Fear as
producing Disease during the present Epidemic Cholera,” The Boston Medical and Surgical Journal 7,
no. 22 (1828-1851), Jan. 9, 1833. 345-346. 345.
71
Ibid., 345.
72
Ibid., 346.
70
33
symptoms are agitation, general uneasiness, disposition to shivering, skin hot, and often moist,
pulse hard and frequent, countenance excited, tongue natural, absence of vomiting and purging,
bowels sometimes confined, excitement of the nervous system and often cramps.”73 The cause
clearly stemmed from the fear of cholera. Yet curing the ailment proved difficult. So difficult, in
fact, that more often than not choleraphobia resulted in death.
Why did Americans fear cholera so much that they created a phobia that killed its hosts?
Part of the fear stems from the suddenness of contracting the disease seemingly out of nowhere,
followed by how quickly those infected died. For example, a resident in cholera-stricken St.
Louis noted how quickly a loved one succumbed to cholera. During a cholera epidemic in 1849,
Micajah Tarver wrote, "Theresa went to bed well and slept well till morning, complained of
slight indigestion after morning, but ate some breakfast. She died about 3 o'clock the same
day."74 The fear of waking up healthy and by evening being on your deathbed frightened
Americans. As fear grew it sent anxieties soaring and turned deadly.
Hydrophobia
Another prominent disease in antebellum America was hydrophobia. “Hydrophobia,” or
rabies, paralyzed the population.75 Sketched depictions and horrifying reports of mad dogs
running wild in cities consistently appeared in newspapers and magazines. The Family
Magazine; or, Monthly Abstract of General Knowledge in 1840 published an article explaining
hydrophobia to the American public. Deadly hydrophobia appeared in densely populated, highly
73
Ibid., 346.
Micajah Tarver, letter to Sol Sublette, 31 August 1849, Sublette Papers, MHS.; Charles Derry,
"Autobiography of Charles Derry," Mormon Immigration Index, 268-270.
75
Hydrophobia was the term used to refer to rabies, because one stage of the disease causes muscle
paralysis and spasms in muscles used to swallow. The muscle spasms and being unable to control muscles
used for drinking (or even swimming) caused fear of water in those infected. For more information on
rabies, see; Matthew Smallman-Raynor, Peter Haggett, and Cliff Andrew, World Atlas of Epidemic
Diseases (U.S.: CRC Press, 2004), 51.
74
34
urbanized cities. Taken from a British report, The Family Magazine explained how a dog turned
mad and revealed its symptoms. The first day of illness it turned irritable, sullen, fidgety, and
plagued by distorted expressions. By the second day, it lost muscle control, seemed prone to
constant movement, and excessive thirst. By the fourth, sometimes fifth day, infected dogs
usually died in convulsions.76 While the magazine reported the British were unsure if
hydrophobia transmitted to humans, opinions differed amongst physicians in America.
Image 2: Sketch of “Mad Dog” infected with rabies printed in The Family
Magazine; or, Monthly Abstract of General Knowledge on May 1, 1840.
Three doctors entered a discussion regarding hydrophobia a year after the magazine
published its article. Doctors John M. Currier and Wm. Ingalls, Jr. wrote a letter to Dr. Wm.
Stockbridge inquiring about a case of hydrophobia. Currie and Ingalls heard about the case as
rumors of the character of the disease swept the medical community and public. The patient
Stockbridge attended resided outside of the North in Louisiana and he found typical hydrophobic
symptoms in his patient. As the patient’s condition worsened and the closer he moved towards
death, the less control he maintained over his mental capacity. Wm. Stockbridge wrote, “The
J.S. Redfield, “HYDROPHOBIA,” The Family Magazine; or, Monthly Abstract of General Knowledge,
(New York: 1840), 7.
76
35
mental faculties retained their sanity until twenty-four hours previous to his death, when they
became deranged, increasing in extent even to furious delirium.”77 Rumors circled his patient’s
death over whether or not it occurred from hydrophobia, and Stockbridge reported it had been.
But had a mad dog bitten the patient? Three years prior to his death a rabid dog bit him, and
three weeks before his death a dog free of symptoms also bit him. Whether or not he died from
either dog bite Stockbridge could not say. Clearly his patient had hydrophobia, but how he
contracted it remained a mystery. The mystery of how people sometimes contracted rabies, and
its effect on the human body and psyche fueled further fears of hydrophobia, and even influenced
treatment of dogs. Owners faced taxes for owning dogs and citizens even killed them without
retribution.78
Like with cholera, mentions of hydrophobia typically occurred at the same time as
colorphobia for comparison and legitimation. Doing so revealed the dangers of colorphobia and
the easiness with which the disease developed. One of the first colorphobia comparisons to
hydrophobia occurred in July of 1839 in The Colored American. Edward Elder Cooper insisted
the nation withered under the sick effects of colorphobia, and the easiest way for producing
symptoms in those infected was by asking a white man or woman about their views on
immediate emancipation. In most cases, just as Mr. Brown was asked during his trip, the person
would be further questioned with: “Would you have your daughter marry a nigger?”79
Cooper thought the only cure for colorphobia was abolitionism, and he found the idea of
colonization for a possible cure as ridiculous. He contended, “this is as much as if you should
attempt to cure hydrophobia by drying up all the water in the world.”80 Instead of getting rid of
“HYDROPHOBIA,” The Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, (1828-1851), 27.15; Nov. 16, 1842), 2.
“Hydrophobia and Dog-Laws,” Maine Farmer, (1844-1900), 17.6; Feb. 8 1849.
79
Edward Elder Cooper, “COLORPHOBIA,” The Colored American, Jul. 13, 1839.
80
Ibid.
77
78
36
the source of fear, such as black people, it seemed more logical to treat those showing symptoms.
Drying up the world’s entire water supply is not only impossible but also ridiculous. Instead of
harshly treating the source of fear, an easier cure would be treating the black population with
kindness and civility, and by embracing abolitionism. Once someone infected became an
abolitionist, they would be cured of their malady, and find the idea of colonization as utterly
unacceptable.
The National Era, another abolitionist newspaper, printed a letter written to a doctor by
“T” in 1847. T requested a weekly supply of the doctor’s “valuable panacea” for an entire year to
soothe their ailment—colorphobia.81 T wrote, “Many of my friends, who have tried your remedy
for certain moral and political diseases, pronounce it one of the best and safest medicines
ever…”82 The medicine sought gave an adverse effect on racially prejudiced whites once taken.
“—when they have tried the remedy, in almost every case, (and some of them very obstinate
ones,) the disease has been entirely cured or its influence very much weakened – particularly
where the medicine has regularly been taken and the directions strictly regarded.”83 Within the
letter T compared colorphobia to hydrophobia. The author insisted the medicine caused reactions
similar to rabies. “Some, after taking a few doses, exhibit considerable nervous excitement – a
slight shuddering – and short, rather incoherent mutterings.”84 Eventually, racially prejudiced
individuals adjusted to the medicine and found themselves cured. Those who suffered from
colorphobia longer endured more violent reactions to the medicine, just as those with
hydrophobia grew worse as the disease raged within their bodies. They suffered from
convulsions, attempted destroying the medicine, and caused mischief or became a public
T, “ALBANY, (N.Y.),” The National Era, Aug, 19, 1847.
Ibid.
83
Ibid.
84
Ibid.
81
82
37
nuisance.85 The medicine T sought was exposure to abolitionism and acceptance of immediatism.
Those with colorphobia needed repeat exposure to abolitionist ideology. Over time, T, like other
abolitionists, thought the individual would see right from wrong and adopt abolitionism.
Steps for Successfully Using Colorphobia
As reports of racial prejudice increased so did abolitionist use of colorphobia. The AntiSlavery Record printed perhaps the first article tackling colorphobia in 1835. While the article’s
title used colorphobia explicitly, the term did not appear in the body of the text. The abolitionist
press commonly adopted this practice for encouraging the interchangeable use of “colorphobia”
and “racial prejudice,” and for also inferring that colorphobia caused any racially prejudiced
event. Abolitionist C. Stuart wrote the editor of the newspaper regarding a conversation he
partook in near Buffalo, New York as he traveled. While in their seats, he and another man
started a conversation regarding the beauty of “color in the white ladies.” Regarding color Stuart
claimed, “But it matters not—the question is insignificant. Mere color has neither good nor evil
in it: it is a physical circumstance, like difference in beauty, height, &c.”86 This claim caused the
fellow traveler to disagree, in which he argued, “Not so, for the Africans are black, and are
inferior to us—they are certainly of a lower race.”87
Their conversation continued in much the same manner. Stuart defended black people
while the other man’s views held. Stuart also claimed that mankind originated from one blood
from God, black people were equal or perhaps even better to white people, and that black men
belonged in America.88 Stuart argued that if black people were sent back to Africa as part of the
85
Ibid.
C. Stuart, “COLORPHOBIA,” The Anti-Slavery Record, May 1835.
87
Ibid.
88
For more information on the “Of One Blood” argument see; Paul Goodman, Of One Blood:
Abolitionism and the Origins of Racial Equality (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California
Press, 2000).
86
38
colonization movement, then white people must in turn be sent back to the European countries.
Their conversation ended when Stuart brought out his Bible, and read him The New Testament
by quoting Acts’ “And hath made of one blood, &c.”89 Stuart’s conversation revealed a stranger
suffering from colorphobia who seemed normal upon first encounter, while simultaneously
revealing many motivations of radical abolitionists. They fought against colonization, believed in
black equality, disapproved of notions of white superiority and racial inferiority, and thought
color did not prove someone’s character. All of these topics were eventually understood and
attacked through the lens of colorphobia. By reporting on the man’s racial prejudice, abolitionists
not only revealed their goals and viewpoints, but also sought alienation of colorphobics from the
population, and shamed them into leaving behind their racially prejudiced ways.
For successful use of colorphobia in their reform agenda, abolitionists took a series of
steps for establishing and legitimizing it in the public realm. Abolitionists defined the disease,
explained what caused it, diagnosed it, found a cure, and continuously reported on it for
maximum exposure. While Stuart’s report on colorphobia revealed various abolitionist topics
and goals, other reports focused more specifically on explaining the disease and tracing its roots.
In 1838, The Herald of Freedom, a Connecticut newspaper published by white abolitionist
Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, published “COLOR-PHOBIA.” Rogers viewed colorphobia as
“fouler than Old Testament leprosy,” and the article established a solid foundation for
abolitionist use of disease agitation. 90 Rogers reported:
Our people have got it. They have got it in the blue, collapse stage.
Many of them have got it so bad, they can’t get well. They will die
of it. It will be a mercy, if the nation does not. What a dignified,
philosophic malady! Dread of complexion.91
C. Stuart, “COLORPHOBIA.”
Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, “COLOR-PHOBIA,” The Herald of Freedom, Nov. 10, 1838.
91
Ibid.
89
90
39
Colorphobia threatened the death of those infected like other epidemics. Americans
suffering from colorphobia “in the blue, collapse stage” references cholera and its final
symptom.92 Often cholera was referenced as “blue cholera” or “blue death,” because many died
with bluish skin hues from dehydration. Likening colorphobia to cholera became part of the
abolitionist tactic of legitimizing and spreading fear of colorphobia. Colorphobia seemed natural
to Americans in a society of racial caste and malicious feelings towards black people even
though it was unnatural, because, “It was injected into their veins and incided into their systems,
by old Doctor Slavery.”93 Therefore, a preventative for colorphobia became the adoption of antislavery or abolitionism. Rogers claimed, “It is a safe preventive and a certain cure. None that
have it, genuine, ever catch slavery or colonization or the color-phobia.”94 Once a man, woman,
or child is cured or inoculated through abolitionism, they will never contract colorphobia from
others. Rogers implied the danger and easy spread of the disease by claiming that a white person
could catch colorphobia just by being near a racially prejudice person, or by staying in a space
where colorphobics had stayed if not inoculated. “An abolitionist can sleep safely all night in a
closed room, where there has been a colonization meeting the day before.”95
How did abolitionists diagnose the disease? Witnessing a public attack or a sudden fit of
racial prejudice seemed to be the only successful way. For example, a nameless individual in
Westfield, Massachusetts suffered an abrupt attack at the sight of a black man, and his
accompanying friends struggled to subdue him.
Many of the symptoms manifested themselves most unequivocally.
It especially appears from the evidence, that he had a quite unusual
dread of coming in contact with persons of a certain color. Yellow,
if from an attack of jaundice, he was not peculiarly affected by, but
92
Ibid.
Ibid.
94
Ibid.
95
Ibid.
93
40
if from a natural hereditary cause, his alarm and uneasiness were
very great. The darker the color, the greater was his dread. While
the white man suffered through his attack, accompanying friends
attempted to subdue and reassure him he was safe. The man he was
afraid of was “by no means such a frightful object – that he was in
fact, quite a harmless, clever sort of a fellow, - but all to no
purpose.96
While his friends easily recognized the man’s colorphobia, diagnosing those infected did
not always go so easily. Editors Benjamin S. Jones and J. Elizabeth Jones of The Anti-Slavery
Bugle reported, “The diagnosis of this disease is a difficult study, as it symptoms are sometimes
of the most contradictory character, and break out at the most unexpected times and places.”97 A
person with colorphobia might sit next to someone on the train or at the local theater, and the
uninfected could have no idea the person next to them is diseased unless a black man, woman, or
child suddenly appeared. According to Frederick Douglass, some obvious symptoms
accompanying an attack were “the hand clenched, head shaking, teeth grating, hysteric yells and
horrid imprecation.”98 All of these symptoms revealed that the man or woman suffering from the
disease appeared normal one moment, and then seemingly quite mad the next. Losing control of
muscles, strange contortions, and unusual behaviors looked remarkably similar to those with
cholera-phobia and hydrophobia.
Another way of describing colorphobia could be accomplished by simply mentioning
racial prejudice and its unfairness. Charles Remond at the New England Anti-Slavery
Convention in 1848 referred to prejudice against color, or colorphobia, as being not only
prevalent, but “as being unkind, unmanly, and predicated upon much that is false.”99 Other than
personal opinions, reports displayed its madness. A report by Frederick Douglass on colorphobia
J.D., “Colorphobia, - A Discovery.,” The North Star, Apr. 27, 1849.
Benjamin S. Jones, J. Elizabeth Jones, “Colorphobia.,” The Anti-slavery Bugle, Aug. 27, 1847.
98
Frederick Douglass, “COLORPHOBIA IN NEW YORK!,” The North Star, May 25, 1849.
99
William Cooper Nell, “New England Anti-Slavery Convention,” The North Star, Jun. 23, 1848.
96
97
41
in New York in 1849 suggested that, “The streets were literally crowded with persons of all
classes afflicted with this terrible malady.” Referred to as an epidemic, colorphobia seemed to be
everywhere a person looked. Those “at a distance of thirty of forty yards, appeared the very
pictures of health, were found, on a nearer approach, most horribly cut and marred.”100 Although
the physical symptoms varied, the mental symptoms of colorphobia remained the same.
Douglass commented on the ruined state of mind of whites by stating:
Monsters, goblins, demons, snakes, lizards and scorpions - all that
was foul, strange and loathsome - seized upon their bewildered
imaginations. Pointing with outstretched arm towards us, its
victims would exclaim, as if startled by some terrible sight "Look! look!" "Where?" "Ah, what?" "Why?" "Why, don't you
see?" "See what?" "Why, that BLACK! BLACK! black!" Then,
with eyes turned up in horror, they would exclaim in the most
unearthly manner, and start off in a furious gallop - running all
around us, and gazing at us, as if they would read our very hearts.
The whole scene was deeply afflicting and terrible.101
Uncontrollable pointing and shouting over free blacks in public space caused white
people mental anguish and revulsion. They lost control over their words and actions from the
mere presence of black people. Whether the prejudiced displayed physical or mental symptoms,
they were easily spotted upon interacting with black persons in non-subservient positions. Free
blacks going about their business unsettled white people. Like those with choleraphobia and
hydrophobia, racially prejudiced minds lacked the ability of control and discretion.
The cause of colorphobia clearly appeared in abolitionist writings and speeches. Slavery
and its establishment of racial hierarchy became the underlying cause of colorphobia. Slavery
created and fostered stereotypes and prejudiced ways of thinking about the black population,
while similar feelings of racial prejudice in the North allowed for the continuance of slavery
based on the color of a population’s skin. By curing colorphobia, the cruel and unusual
100
101
Frederick Douglass, “COLORPHOBIA IN NEW YORK!,”
Ibid.
42
institution of slavery would completely crumble in America. Charles Remond at the AntiSlavery Convention claimed abolition would end colorphobia once and for all, while William
Lloyd Garrison wrote “American Colorphobia” in 1847 to argue about the injustice of slavery
and how the system encouraged racial prejudice. The system of slavery created complexional
caste, which became a way to ensure slavery’s survival. Immediate emancipation served as the
best cure for colorphobia. Garrison wrote that, “the slave Power is continually growing weaker,”
and as it continues to weaken, colorphobia logically should too.102 However, as seen in the
North, colorphobia grew stronger the more the free population grew. As they more frequently
deployed colorphobia radical abolitionists came to understand that eliminating slavery and
preaching of its immorality would not fully cure the North of its racial prejudice. Immediate
emancipation combined with the establishment of equal rights would effectively cure the disease.
Lastly, like with any disease, abolitionists had to decide on who the real victims of racial
prejudice were. Immigrants and black people served as the scapegoats of cholera and mad dogs
spread hydrophobia—but what about colorphobia? Douglass’ report on colorphobia in New
York revealed his stance on victims of colorphobia. He thought the racially prejudiced deserved
pity with their delusions and frightening symptoms.103 Some abolitionists sought to assign blame,
but one by the initials “J.D.” went so far as to wonder whether or not to despise those with
colorphobia or pity them. Fear and violent side effects tormented those with colorphobia, and if
someone witnessed an attack, one might logically find pity for their circumstances. However,
J.D., writing for The North Star, argued otherwise:
But then, when we consider that this is the result of ignorance –
ignorance of the most deplorable description, which they might, if
they had chosen, have prevented – our pity becomes, in some
William Lloyd Garrison, “American Colorphobia,” The Liberator, Jun. 11, 1847.
Frederick Douglass, “Colorphobia in New York! The fifth of May will long be remembered,” The
North Star, May 25, 1849.
102
103
43
degree, modified by an admixture of contempt. Besides the
ignorance, there is always a certain degree of meanness attaching
to the disposition of the man who suffers from this malady. The
man of noble and refined sentiments, and warm, generous
sensibilities, is never thus afflicted.104
J.D. suggested that since colorphobia could be avoided by becoming an abolitionist, there
remained no reason for pitying those with it. By not inoculating oneself against the disease, the
white population left themselves susceptible to infection. The “man of noble and refined
sentiments” is thus an abolitionist, and is free from worrying about developing the debilitating
malady. Lobbying for rights, immediate emancipation, and curing the North instead of pitying
those who never would have developed the disease had they become anti-slavery oriented
seemed like time better spent.
Preventing Colorphobia
While comparisons of disease and colorphobia occurred, and individuals sought a cure,
abolitionists also searched for ways to prevent colorphobia. Proper education for children proved
vital. Abolitionists applied the early nineteenth-century penchant for moral education as a means
of disease prevention. Female abolitionists found themselves especially concerned with the
upcoming generation. As the future of the country, children had to learn about the evils of
slavery and racial prejudice to stop colorphobia. One female abolitionist referenced to as Mrs.
Griffing spoke to mothers of young children during an abolitionist meeting at New Market. She
encouraged mothers of all ages to “make their children Anti-Slavery; from their very infancy, to
imbue them with the sentiments and practice of kindness and love towards the sorrowful and
unfortunate everywhere.”105 Inoculation against disease at any age became of dire importance.
Anti-Slavery indoctrination ensured the end of racial prejudice in the United States.
104
105
J.D., “Colorphobia – Who are its Victims?,” The North Star, Oct. 6, 1848.
C.F.P., “Meetings at New Market, Massillon, and Akron,” The Anti-slavery Bugle, Oct. 4, 1851.
44
Raising children in proper anti-slavery environments became key for prevention.
Colorphobia lacked a biological root to the disease; it was learned from the surrounding social
environment. The Anti-slavery Bugle in 1846 published a report by C.F.P. arguing about the
racial innocence of children, and that racial prejudice originated from outside influences. In
Franklin County a colorphobia-free female teacher oversaw a classroom in a district school full
of all white students except for one young black boy. The teacher had yet “learnt to construct a
scale or privileges from the color of the skin, any more from that of the hair, but verily believed
that of one blood God had made all nations.”106 Because of this the teacher allowed the boy to
intermingle with the white children. His classmates had also not been instilled with racial
prejudice yet to “scent out his inferiority, treated him as one of their own species.”107 The teacher
encouraged their interactions by allowing the black student to sit, stand, and play with the white
students, “just as though he were a human being, and had no infectious or contagious disease
about him.”108 By doing so she hoped to prevent the children from developing colorphobia as
they aged.
By fostering a non-prejudiced environment, children in classrooms would learn to not be
racially prejudice. Children are not born with hate, fear of black people, or fear of disease. If
abolitionists, like the teacher, could instill abolitionism and anti-slavery views within the new
generation in the United States early on, then colorphobia could disappear. Colorphobia
developed from environmental and social factors rather than a virus or bacteria. The only cure
could come from changing the society that spawned it. The newest generation could be saved,
and in turn save the future of America.
C.F.P., “From the Worcester County Gazette. Toassant L’Overture,” The Anti-slavery Bugle, Aug. 28,
1846.
107
Ibid.
108
Ibid.
106
45
While allowing white children to play with black children in an environment free of
racial prejudice at school combated colorphobia and instilled values of equality, abolitionists
sought an even more effective way of teaching youth about the perils and ills of slavery through
writing about it in children books. Elizabeth J. Jones published a book in 1848 through the AntiSlavery Office in Boston entitled, The Young Abolitionists, or, Conversations on Slavery.
Written for children old enough to read on their own, the story followed a northern white family
concerned with instilling abolitionist values in their children. The book consisted of twelve short
chapters of different events that touched on abolitionism and abolitionist interests experienced
through the children.
The first chapter centered on young Charlie Selden who desired to attend an abolitionist
meeting. Charlie first inquired about whom abolitionists were, and his mother responded that an
abolitionist “is one who is endeavoring to liberate the slaves, my dear.”109 Confused about
slavery, Charlie asked whether or not their house servant was a slave. His mother quickly
explained the difference between slave labor and free labor by explaining that Biddy received
good pay and had the option of seeking employment elsewhere. Jones filled the rest of the
chapter with other abolitionist concerns regarding the black population, such as education,
humanity, and cruelty. The following chapters explored abolitionist themes like religion and
freedom, and traced the evolution of the Selden children into abolitionists. By the twelfth and
final chapter, Charlie’s mother talked to him about slaves obtaining freedom and the challenges
abolitionists continuously faced, like meetinghouses being burned, and personal property being
vandalized and destroyed.110 Through explaining the evils of slavery and abolitionism,
109
Elizabeth J. Jones, The Young Abolitionists, or, Conversations on Slavery (Boston: Anti-Slavery
Office, 1849), 3.
110
Ibid., 121-122.
46
abolitionists hoped children would adopt abolitionist values and ideas early on, and inoculate
themselves against colorphobia before racial prejudice became an issue in their lives.
Another book published on the evils of slavery was Abel Thomas’ Gospel of Slavery: A
Primer of Freedom. Concerned with race relations during the Civil War, Thomas created an
illustrated A-to-Z in 1864 explaining the wrongs of slavery and sketches depicting what each
letter stood for. When children reached the letter “F” they found the word “fugitives” and a
picture showing what fugitive slaves endured.111 Images were extremely important to Thomas’
work, because most children learn better through pictures. Reading and listening to stories about
slaves and the immorality of slavery served a purpose, but visualization impacted children more
thoroughly and encouraged them into adopting abolition—especially in the free North.
Image 3: Letter “F” in Abel Thomas’ Gospel of Slavery: A Primer of Freedom.
111
Abel Thomas, Gospel of Slavery: A Primer of Freedom (New York: T.W. Strong, 1864), 8.
47
Early childhood prevention and education through abolitionist writings and educational
tactics created the opportunity for ending colorphobia in the newest generation. However,
infected white parents and communally active adults fought over segregated schooling, equal
education, and educational opportunities. Schools and education received massive attention from
abolitionists in regards to educational reform, as well as instances of colorphobia preventing
black children from receiving an equal education. Arguments over children and their learning
environment complicated the hope of childhood inoculation. Accomplishing early childhood
prevention became much harder than radical abolitionists first imagined.
48
Chapter 2
Deploying Colorphobia
On July 19, 1839 white abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison reprinted an article from the
Lynn Record about the newly adopted “colorphobia” in his newspaper. The Lynn Record’s
publisher James Buffum wrote that colorphobia “signifies dread of color as applied to the human
species; and what seems strange, is much more prevalent at the North than the South.”112 In the
North white persons balked at the idea or sight of black individuals riding in the same carriage or
sharing the same dining area on a steamboat. Yet Buffum argued that, “On the contrary, nothing
is more provoking to the slaveholders themselves, than to exclude their colored servants from the
inside of stage coaches, as is the villainous practice in New England.”113 Buffum gave a basic
definition of the disease, and showed the irrationality of it existing in the North when even
southern slaveholders held no qualms about slaves sharing the same public space. When
abolitionists deployed colorphobia, they typically started with basic commentary about the state
of racial prejudice in society and followed with an example of a colorphobic incident. They then
used the incident as a tool to critique society and encourage reform.
Buffum’s critique displayed the irrationality, hypocrisy, and ridiculousness of
colorphobia with an example from the previous Fourth of July. One Massachusetts railway
teemed with such an overabundance of passengers on the patriotic holiday that lack of seating
quickly became problematic. However, one entire train car remained empty except for one
person—a black gentleman sitting alone “whose dark skin had frightened away the delicate
whites.” With train cars so overcrowded Buffum believed it illogical that white passengers did
not ride in an open car. Such behavior on Independence Day illustrated the nonsensical aspect
112
113
James Buffum, “Colorphobia,” The Liberator, Jul. 19, 1839.
Ibid.
49
and hypocrisy of colorphobia. Countless numbers of people sought public transportation to
Boston, but because a black man resided in a car they refused transportation. Only when white
men free of colorphobia sought transportation did the car fill up. Buffum further declared,
“Albeit, there were men of Independence in Lynn, who were then going to hear and celebrate the
Declaration, ‘that all men are born free and equal, and have certain inalienable rights,’ whose
principles were more than skin deep, and who did not hesitate to occupy these very acceptable
vacant seats. How very shallow is pride!”114 On a day where Americans celebrated their
independence and values, they failed in caring that a large portion of their population lacked the
same equal rights. Colorphobia, or racial prejudice, kept white Americans from giving the black
population natural rights they felt the Declaration of Independence guaranteed.
This chapter shows how abolitionists deployed colorphobia, and argues that it became a
tactic used mostly by black abolitionists for the promotion of equal rights, fair treatment, and
advancement of their race. Reports on colorphobia appeared in white and black abolitionist
newspapers alike during the 1830s. White abolitionists like William Lloyd Garrison lent support
by reprinting articles and letters dealing with the term, writing pieces themselves, or by speaking
about it. However, as using colorphobia became more popular in the following decades black
abolitionists dominated the conversation. Black abolitionists, such as Frederick Douglass,
William Cooper Nell, William Wells Brown, and James McCune Smith concerned themselves
most with the spread of colorphobia throughout northern cities because it negatively impacted
their lives. White abolitionists denounced the disease, but they did not suffer at the hands of
prejudiced individuals in the same way as the black population. The black population met insults,
discrimination, and even violence on a daily basis in public space. Black advancement remained
impossible with racial prejudice blocking black men, women, and children from every direction.
114
Ibid.
50
The future of the African American drove black abolitionists into an intellectual battle
sometimes fueled by civil disobedience measures as the black population remained victims of
racial hierarchy and white supremacy.
Yet not all freedmen in the North felt the same about confronting racial status quos and
facing the consequences. The year before Garrison reprinted Buffum’s article on colorphobia he
relayed a quick piece of commentary on the disease. Anonymous abolitionist Herald of Freedom
claimed, “Dark complexioned people are said to be peculiarly hostile to anti-slavery—and there
is a good deal of truth in it. You find men—and women too—of such sable complexion that you
would expect them to feel personally interested in the success of the enterprise and they are
bitterness and colorphobia personified.”115 Parts of the black population, afraid of the
ramifications of battling racial prejudice, bristled at just the mention of colorphobia. As
Frederick Douglass would soon discover, much of the northern black population seemed hesitant
about changing their social status in the United States during the 1800s. But black abolitionists
served as “many honorable exceptions to this rule—but be careful of talking anti-slavery in very
dark-white company.”116 Whether or not the general black population approved of using
colorphobia, it appeared more frequently in the 1840s and 1850s as black abolitionists displayed
racially prejudiced episodes in newspapers and critiqued all realms of public space—
transportation, businesses, clubs, organizations, entertainment, churches and religion, morality,
education, and even black advancement and betterment.
Colorphobia & Public Space:
Late 1830s-1860s
Public Transportation
115
116
Herald of Freedom, “Dark Complexioned People,” The Liberator, Jul. 6, 1838.
Ibid.
51
“The Alida Outrage,” “Another Development of Colorphobia,” “Colorphobia on a City
Railroad,” and other article titles referencing racially prejudiced occurrences on segregated
public transportation jumped out at readers of abolitionist newspapers beginning mostly in the
1840s. Mistreatment of African Americans by white men and women due to exclusionist
practices occurred on railroads, steamboats, carriages, and omnibuses in northern cities on a
daily basis. The North instituted segregation to keep black people separated from white
Americans in public space. Segregation impacted life in various ways. For example, in
Massachusetts “as late as 1843 Negroes were forbidden to marry whites; they were segregated in
the churches, where they occupied the ‘Negro Pew’; they were confined to the most menial
occupations; they could not attend the same schools as white children—in Boston this situation
continued into 1855; they were segregated on stagecoaches, railroads and steamboats.”117 As a
result, reports of famous and non-famous abolitionists alike experiencing or witnessing
colorphobia on public transportation commonly graced the pages of abolitionist newspapers.
Focusing on two transportation lines allows for a better understanding of the impact of
colorphobia on the black population and its use as a reform tactic. The first case study looks at
colorphobia on the Eastern Railroad in Massachusetts and the impact of fame and public support;
and the second observes potential economic gains of steamboat Oregon for practicing noncolorphobic business operations and promotion by the abolitionist press.
In 1839 Theodore Dwight Weld claimed that white men and women holding prejudice
against black people happened to be of the “vulgar” variety. Vulgarity flourished in the New
England area with churchgoers, merchants, businessmen, and the poor suffering from
colorphobia. Even men of substantial wealth and premiere social standing could not escape racial
Louis Ruchames, “Jim Crow Railroads in Massachusetts,” American Quarterly, (Spring 1956), 8.1,
61-75. 61.
117
52
prejudice—especially those connected to the Eastern Railroad. Surrounded by such a vulgar
public and having multiple accounts of racially prejudiced treatment on the Eastern Railroad,
abolitionist Theodore Dwight Weld asked readers of The Emancipator, “Are the directors of the
eastern railroad vulgar people that they direct colored men to be turned neck and heels out of
their passage cars!”118 Three years prior to Weld’s assertion in 1836 Stephen A. Chase, serving
as superintendent, established the Eastern Railroad in Boston. The line extended “at first from
Boston to Salem and later reaching the New Hampshire border; the New Bedford and Taunton
trunk line; and the Boston and Providence Railroad.”119
The naming of the “colored car” and the attention received from the Eastern Railroad’s
treatment of Frederick Douglass made Massachusetts’s segregation different in comparison to
other states. In 1838 a letter written to the Massachusetts Spy referred to the car as “the dirt
car.”120 Three years later in 1841 the term “Jim Crow” car appeared from the prejudiced idea that
black men, women, and children were inferior and ignorant. The term originated from a popular
song and dance routine created by Thomas D. Rice in which a white person imitated black
persons.121 The term caught on, and became popularly used for referencing segregated cars and
eventually other public spaces. A year prior to Douglass’ ordeal on the Eastern Railroad Garrison
reported on two black men by the names of Thomas Jinnings and David Ruggles (the latter an
abolitionist) facing eviction on two separate railroad cars in 1840. Ruggles, who sustained torn
clothing, loss of personal items, and injury sued for reparations but lost in a prejudiced court
system.122
Mass. Abolitionist, “The Vulgar,” The Emancipator, Nov. 21, 1839.
Louis Ruchames, “Jim Crow Railroads in Massachusetts,” 62.
120
Reprinted in The Liberator, VIII, Dec. 14, 1838.
121
Louis Ruchames, “Jim Crow Railroads in Massachusetts,” 62.
122
Manisha Sinha, The Slave’s Cause: A History of Abolition (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 2016), 327.
118
119
53
On the morning of October 13, 1841 subscribers to the Christian Reflector read about an
ordeal that occurred on the Eastern Railroad similar to those suffered by Jinnings and Ruggles.
An abolitionist writing under the name Free American revealed the immoral and racially
prejudiced business practices of the Eastern Railroad from its unequal and violent treatment
towards black passengers. Free American wrote, “We are glad to see that the Eastern Railroad,
which has long been laboring under the first stages of colorphobia, has reached a crisis in the
disease. In other words, it has taken consistent and thorough pro-slavery ground.”123 Conductors
were known for physically handling and violently dragging away black passengers in the 1830s,
so what was new about the company’s actions? What had prompted such a “crisis in the
disease?” The unjust treatment towards the most influential black individual of the antebellum
period served as the event that finally caused Free American to write such an article.
One morning in Boston, Frederick Douglass boarded an Eastern Railroad car with fellow
abolitionist John A. Collins and the two friends sat together—even though black people were
supposed to ride in third-class. Collins believed that since they traveled together and paid the
same ticket price Douglass should instead sit with him in the white car. By sitting in a non-thirdclass seat Douglass instigated a violent confrontation—which commonly occurred on public
transportation in similar scenarios. Moments after sitting, railroad workers confronted Collins
and Douglass over their seating arrangements and seized both men. The same day Collins and
Douglass found themselves roughly handled by the Eastern Railroad Company another man
faced similar treatment. The younger man took his seat and the conductor “on seeing him,
without saying a word to him, brought him six stout men, and ordered them to put him out.”124
Several other white passengers protested such violent treatment and found themselves kicked off
123
124
Free American, “General Intelligence.: Who Shall Ride?,” Christian Reflector, Oct. 13, 1841.
Ibid.
54
the railcar with the black man. Three of them, one a doctor and another a bishop, sustained
injuries. Even prominent, successful white men lacked immunity from white workers mad with
colorphobia.
Two days after the report of the Eastern Railroad’s behavior towards John A. Collins and
Frederick Douglass, Garrison published a letter from Collins giving a firsthand account of the
ordeal in The Liberator. Collins wrote Garrison to relay the incident to other abolitionists, shed
light on a morally corrupt company, condemn it and its workers for spreading racial prejudice,
and for revealing the hypocritical nature of American Christianity. Collins claimed, “Never was
there a more malicious and hyena-like spirit exhibited by any body of men than by the servants
of this company, who are acting under the orders and command of Stephen A. Chase, the
Superintendent—who, by the way, is an influential member of the Society of Friends, of the
orthodox school.”125 Already within the first paragraph of the letter Collins revealed one of
America’s glaring hypocrisies. How could a country harbor such morally corrupt individuals
when it claimed it to be predominantly Christian? The answer seemed simple to abolitionists—
American Christianity teemed with racial prejudice that ruined religious ideals, values, and
morals. Its corruption encouraged poor treatment towards black persons. To Collins, Chase’s
Quakerism seemed extremely problematic because of Quaker history regarding slavery.
Quakers became the first religious group that denounced slavery in Europe and American
Quakers similarly adopted anti-slavery values. Historians have argued over whether or not
Quakers worried purely about the morality of enslaving a fellow human being or also
simultaneously served selfish economic interests. According to historian Thomas Bender,
economic self-interest spurred the rise of anti-slavery, and Quakers served as the premiere
John A. Collins, “Communications.: Eastern Rail-Road—Colorphobia—Lynch Law—Robery—
Quakerism,” The Liberator, Oct. 15, 1841.
125
55
example of the connection between capitalism and anti-slavery values. Being barred from jobs of
influence and prestige in Britain and America led Quakers to careers of moneymaking, such as
mining, banking, and shipping.126 Forced into jobs focused solely on profiting, Quakers grew
concerned with factory labor. To legitimize factory wage labor slavery had to end. Quakers
profited both morally and financially through abolitionism by freeing mankind from bondage
while opening up the market’s labor force. The damaging effects on religion are displayed by
Chase’s support for racially prejudiced actions even though he was a Quaker. Even the most
religious individual or person from a religious background lacked immunity from colorphobia.
After Collins pointed out Chase’s contradictory character he explained what happened.
After buying tickets for passage to Dover, New Hampshire for the Stafford Anti-Slavery Meeting
Collins and Douglass sat together. Collins claimed, “No sooner were we seated, than the
conductor made his appearance, and peremptorily ordered Douglass to leave, and to take his seat
in the forward car; meaning the ‘Jim Crow,’ though he felt ashamed to call it by that name.”127
Collins figured protesting would be in vain, but since no white person around them had
complained he assisted Douglass in a show of civil disobedience. Collins stayed put and kept the
conductor from removing Douglass but approximately five other railroad workers were called
upon for assistance. Collins sustained injuries from the tussle and Douglass’ clothes tore from
being tossed into the Jim Crow car. The conductor returned and reprimanded Collins’ support of
black protest while a second conductor sought out Douglass. The second conductor declared that,
“This rule of the Directors can’t be so bad, for the churches, you know, have their ‘negro
126
Thomas Bender, The Antislavery Debate: Capitalism and Abolitionism as a Problem in Historical
Interpretation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992). 48.
127
John A. Collins, “Communications.: Eastern Rail-Road—Colorphobia—Lynch Law—Robery—
Quakerism.”
56
pews.’”128 An Eastern Railroad employee further revealed the absurdity of American Christianity
by pointing out segregation in church and unfair treatment towards religious brethren. If moral
institutions separated black Americans from white congregations, why could public
transportation not do the same? According to abolitionists, racial prejudice corrupted religion,
and as it spread throughout churches no public space remained safe from its influence.
A third abolitionist traveling with Collins and Douglass supplied his account of what
happened to The Colored American. Writing under the initials of G.F., the man claimed they
were headed for the Strafford Anti-Slavery Meeting after a successful meeting in Boston the
previous evening. The three had only been seated for a few moments when a railroad worker
entered the “Jim Crow” car, where G.F. resided, and exclaimed he was not dark enough for a
second-class seat.129 G.F., whose skin color was not confirmed in his letter, reluctantly made his
way to one of the white cars after challenging segregation standards. As the battle over
segregated public transportation continued over the years it became more common for
abolitionists, whether alone or with a friend, to board trains and challenge seating arrangements.
After G.F. found his seat the conductor of the “white cars,” a Mr. Bancroft, immediately
approached Douglass. While Bancroft insisted Douglass move to the Jim Crow car on account of
company policy, other railroad workers surrounded him in an attempt of intimidation. The men
tossed Douglass into the “cage for black folks” with a curse and highly disturbed the white
passengers. One gentleman visiting from the South, shocked by the flagrant display of
colorphobia, shared with G.F. that his wife had not witnessed such a sight on another railroad.
Having a southerner complain about black treatment hopefully helped shame more northern
abolitionists into addressing and curing colorphobia. When comparing Douglass’ irrational
128
129
Ibid.
G.F., “A Shameful Deed,” The Colored American, Oct. 30, 1841.
57
treatment on the railroad to the kindness he had received at the meeting mere hours prior, G.F.
concluded that Douglass fell victim to the disease. Not only did the railroad workers suffer from
colorphobia, but they also specifically targeted Douglass and Collins, because they were
“‘damned abolitionists’ and traveled in interracial groups.”130
The mistreatment of Frederick Douglass added greatly to the company’s history of
colorphobia. But who was Frederick Douglass, and why was he so instrumental for ending racial
prejudice and segregation practices on public transportation? Frederick Douglass was born a
slave in Talbot County, Maryland around the year 1818.131 He spent much of his time enslaved
in Baltimore before he fled to the North. Douglass worked under William Lloyd Garrison before
establishing his newspaper The North Star (which would come to be known as Frederick
Douglass’ Paper). Douglass became well known for his Narrative of the Life of Frederick
Douglass, An American Slave funded by abolitionists. Not only did he have a narrative,
newspaper, and an autobiography by 1845, but he also spent time abroad in England and Ireland
on a speaking tour. Douglass’ publications, tours, and continuous critiquing of American society
made him one of the most famous men in America regardless of color. Reporting on colorphobia
outbreaks involving Douglass became useful for two reasons. The first reason showed that no
matter how respectable and established a black person might be mistreatment would continue
unless white Americans were cured. Second, having a famous name involved brought more
attention to racial prejudice. Anyone reading about the article would know the individual,
whether personally or by name, and would feel more connected to the incident. Colorphobia
turned into a more dire concern if a person could connect to someone affected by it.
Manisha Sinha, The Slave’s Cause: A History of Abolition, 327.
For information on Frederick Douglass and his life, see: Frederick Douglass, The Life and Times of
Frederick Douglass: His early life as a slave, his escape from bondage, and his complete history (Boston:
Massachusetts, DE Wolfe & Fiske Co, 1845).
130
131
58
While portraying Douglass as a victim of colorphobia had its benefits for the abolitionist
community, the treatment he received from the Eastern Railroad influenced his critiques on
public transportation. Douglass endured harsh treatment on various modes of transportation and
from different companies, yet he viewed the Eastern Railroad as the worst perpetrator. In his
autobiography Douglass penned:
My treatment in the use of public conveyances at these times was
extremely rough, especially on the Eastern railroad from Boston to
Portland. On that road, as many others, there was a mean, dirty and
uncomfortable car set apart for colored travellers, called the ‘Jim
Crow’ car. Regarding this as the fruit of slave-holding prejudice,
and being determined to fight the spirit of slavery wherever I might
find it, I resolved to avoid this car, though it sometimes required
some courage to do so.132
Not all black men and women felt comfortable with rebelling against Jim Crow cars and
segregationist policies. Douglass commented that most free blacks accepted their assigned
seating and believed confrontation only made matters worse. He, like other black abolitionists,
knew that bowing down to racially prejudiced demands and rules only reinforced and spread
colorphobia further. Whether he faced expulsion from the company’s car or physical violence,
Douglass knew combating colorphobia through black resistance remained much more important
than whatever injuries he sustained. Douglass’ rebuttal against the railroad’s segregated seating
spurred a drastic response from superintendent Chase. Douglass wrote, “The result was that
Stephen A. Chase, superintendent of the road, ordered all passenger trains to pass through Lynn
(where I then lived) without stopping.”133 Other passengers and businesses suffered in Lynn from
trains no longer stopping, but the community supported Douglass’ actions and denounced
Chase’s line.
132
133
Frederick Douglass, “Frederick Douglass,” Michigan Farmer, Jul. 27, 1886.
Ibid.
59
The town’s newspaper, the Lynn Record, displayed its support for Douglass and its anger
towards the Eastern Railroad with a scathing article written by R.S. The journalist questioned the
company’s right over controlling seating of “free citizens” and what could be done about it. He
wrote, “If the corporation will persist in enforcing this regulation, an appeal to the Legislature
should be made, not by the colored race themselves, but by every white person who feels the
insult offered to his species by their attempt to degrade his fellow-man on account of his
complexion.”134 Even though the community of Lynn stood together on the issue of car
segregation, Chase refused the abolishment of the Jim Crow car. Chase instead catered to
individuals with prejudiced tendencies reflective of the railroad’s directors. Petitions and
meetings by abolitionists held over the Eastern Railroad’s treatment of black riders garnered
statewide support and sympathy from the public.135 Even though Douglass did not achieve his
desired results of unsegregated seating he did elicit a radical response. Chase’s reaction proved
that white people grew intimidated by black resistance, and it further encouraged Douglass’
activist attempts and outward encouragement for reform.
Douglass did not only serve as an important figure in the abolitionist press from
experiencing colorphobia firsthand. He also relayed reports and used them for encouraging racial
reform in his own newspaper. For example, in 1855 in Frederick Douglass’ Paper he published
an incident of colorphobia regarding a wealthy black businessman. Thomas Downing of
Rochester, New York found himself nearly expelled from a railroad car. Downing, a well-to-do
and well-known man, had a reputation in the community of outstanding character. Downing
made his money and built his status through selling oysters.136 One evening one of his female
customers asked Downing for assistance in mailing letters and he agreed. Together they entered
R.S., “Distinction of Color in Rail-Road Cars,” The Liberator, Oct. 1, 1841.
Manisha Sinha, The Slave’s Cause: A History of Abolition (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 2016), 327.
136
“COLORPHOBIA ON A CITY RAILROAD,” Frederick Douglass’ Paper, Oct. 5, 1855.
134
135
60
a city railroad car but the conductor disliked their presence and threatened to kick them off.
Downing told the conductor they had letters to deliver and refused. Downing reported, “Then
two or three gentlemen, who sat opposite us, told us to sit still, as the conductor had no right to
put us out, as we had as much right to ride as they had.”137 The ride continued with threats from
the conductor of getting the police but other passengers who recognized him defended Downing
and his companion. When the conductor refused to let Downing out at his desired stop as a form
of retaliation, a white gentleman requested for him and the three passengers exited the car. Like
Douglass, Downing was a self-made and widely known black man in Rochester in the 1850s.
Even with an outstanding reputation he became the target of racial prejudice. Douglass printed
this incident to show how white people could assist free blacks by supporting their right to freely
interact in public space and assist them in challenging the racial status quo. Black resistance
gaining white support helped emphasize the irrational actions of the driver and proved that racial
prejudice did not have to exist in the white population.
Attacks on Douglass and others spurred condemnations and cries for change within the
abolitionist circle. Other problematic events on public transportation drew attention as years
passed. Steamboats in New York attracted abolitionist coverage as two companies condoned
colorphobia and a third received promotion in the press for its lack of racial prejudice. By
promoting business to a specific steamboat, abolitionists hoped to hurt the profits and reputations
of anti-black vessels by attracting attention to their racial prejudice and shame the company into
abandoning its prejudiced ways. If a business venture suffered economic distress there would be
no way around implementing colorphobia-free business standards. Economic ruin served as a
good motivator for change.
137
Ibid.
61
Seven years after Douglass’ experience with the Eastern Railroad the first report
promoting passage on steamboat Oregon appeared in his newspaper. The completion of the
steamboat occurred in the spring of 1845 with its official first launch from Smith & Dimon’s
Yard.138 Steamboat Oregon’s service route spanned from New York to Providence, and it
supplied three years of service before an incident in 1848 on another steamboat drew abolitionist
attention to the vessel. On September 11, 1848 in Buffalo, New York a group of freedmen from
the Cleveland Convention sought cabin accommodations. However, the workers on steamboat
Saratoga, like those employed by the Eastern Railroad, suffered from colorphobia and denied
men such passage. A.H. Francis, who wrote to The North Star about the experience, revealed
that, “The reason assigned by the Clerk, who I think they call Merrell, (at all events he may be
easily known by his diminutive, sallow sycophant expression of countenance, and much sooner I
should judge by his language,) was, that colored persons could not be permitted in the cabin
among whites.”139 A black servant working for steamboat Saratoga disheartened the black
travelers for being a “heterogenous mass of abomination” and supporting white Merrell instead
of other black persons. The servant embodied what Douglass and Francis feared from the black
population—that white pressure and power kept many black persons silent when faced with
outbursts aimed at themselves and others.
A free black man working for a racially prejudiced company and supporting its actions
was counterproductive and hurt the fight against segregation. The delegates waited an entire day
before boarding another steamboat. This time they chose the Oregon for its fair racial policies
and practices—they encountered no problems. Of his time spent on steamboat Oregon Francis
wrote, “The boat is of the first class in style and speed—Capt. Chatman, the Clerk Mr. Waldron,
138
139
James Gordon Bennett, Sr., “Launch of the Steamboat Oregon,” The New York Herald, May 25, 1845.
A.H. Francis, “Editors of the North Star,” The North Star, Sep. 15, 1848.
62
the Steward, and the balance of the crew, so far as came under our notice, are just about, to say
the least, what they ought to be.”140 By a balanced crew Francis meant the workers were not one
race. Unlike a singular black servant on the Saratoga, crew composition ranged from an all-color
spectrum. A mixed-race working environment provided passengers of both races suitable and
equal accommodations. Steamboat Oregon supplied an ideal public space—one free of
colorphobia.
Nearly a year later another report surfaced in The North Star promoting steamboat
Oregon. A black family sought passage on the steamer Rip Van Winkle in Albany, New York.
While the head of the family, Newport F. Henry, bought tickets his wife walked onto the
promenade deck to stay out of the way of boarding passengers and workers scurrying about.
Almost immediately her presence brought forth an outburst from one of the workers. The worker
ordered her below deck because she did not belong where white passengers mingled. Her
husband found himself also ordered below when he joined his wife, and highly insulted, the
entire family demanded their money back before taking their business elsewhere. Once on
steamboat Oregon the Henry Family received fair and equal treatment like the rest of the
customers regardless of their race. The abolitionist writing under the name Penn. Freeman wrote
about the Henry Family ordeal and Douglass relayed in The North Star. They claimed:
We trust that every man of honor and right feeling, who shall have
the opportunity, will give practical proof of his appreciation of the
disgraceful conduct of the of the Rip Van Winkle, and the
honorable contrast given to it by the officers of the Oregon. Men
who can insult and outrage respectable women, on account of their
complexion, generally have an avenue to their consciences through
the pocket, if all others are closed, and the public an make an
appeal to them which they will feel. Such an appeal should never
be omitted.141
140
141
Ibid.
Penn. Freeman, “Colorphobia on Steamboats,” The North Star, Aug. 10, 1849.
63
Like with steamboat Saratoga, Rip Van Winkle customers found themselves forced into
taking their business elsewhere. Treatment on steamboat Oregon again proved itself free of
colorphobia and served the Henrys as equals. The report asserted that a white man suffering from
an outburst of colorphobia verbally attacked a “respectable woman,” and it further supplied proof
that any black person of sound character remained vulnerable to racial prejudice. Douglass
encouraged travel on steamboat Oregon to economically strain steamboat Rip Van Winkle.
Owners and employers of transportation services would only reform their standards if they hurt
financially. Abolitionists thought that if enough people boycotted corrupted companies then they
would have to adapt to the new reality of the communities they served—the reality that freedmen
were there to stay.
Obtaining enough outside media coverage and public attention for their cause concerned
abolitionists. How much did national or non-abolitionist newspapers report on colorphobia? The
New York Tribune, founded by Horace Greeley, published an article on the Henry Family
incident on August 4, 1849.142 The story appeared in The New York Tribune six days before
Douglass’ paper relayed the story. Commentary on gender and race functioned as the only
differences in Douglass’ printing. Greeley’s version mentioned what the Henry Family
experienced, but did not include advocacy for social change and racial reform like the
abolitionist version. While there is no real method for measuring how much of an impact the
application of colorphobia had on society, the fact that popular newspapers outside of the
abolitionist movement reported on it reveals the weight behind the reform tactic.
Businesses, Entertainment, Clubs, & Organizations
Like public transportation, businesses, live entertainment, clubs, and organizations in
northern states often segregated their operations or even banned the black population from
142
Horace Greeley, “Colorphobia on Steamboats,” The New York Tribune, Aug. 4. 1849.
64
entering the premises. Drugstores, theaters, clubs, and organizations practiced exclusivity when
it came to customers or potential members as owners and established members labored under the
ill effects of racial prejudice. Racial prejudice fueled treatment of black men and women and
impacted the atmosphere of public shows. Even when black persons received invitations to
private parties colorphobia blocked them from joining. On January 23, 1848 prominent
abolitionists Frederick Douglass and William Cooper Nell accepted invitations to a celebration
of Franklin’s birthday and set off for the Irving House in Rochester, New York. The arrival of
two black men, regardless of their good characters, created controversy. In response to objections
from a handful of other guests, the host turned the two away. Nell recalled in a letter to Garrison
that, “It was in vain that we protested against his insult, and asserted our claim to equal treatment
with others. We were called intruders, and told, that it ‘was a violation of the rules of society for
colored people to associate with whites,’ and were threatened ejectment by the police.”143 Other
white partygoers not afflicted with racial prejudice intervened on behalf of Douglass and Nell,
however. After white guests supported them the abolitionists attended the party they had already
received invitations for. Black guests suddenly found themselves unwelcomed when colorphobia
appeared—instead they felt inferior and became unworthy of attending the same event. Douglass
and Nell thankfully found support like Downing from unprejudiced white persons. Once again
white assistance helped black persons beat colorphobia.
Businesses fell prone to colorphobic tendencies; whether owners or workers themselves
were prejudiced or the inside of the business hosted an incident. Owners even suffered
economically or potentially suffered from the consequences of racial prejudice. The apothecary
shop run by Stephen S. Thayer that banned black customers serves as a good example of race
anxieties impacting business. Black customers were not banned because Thayer himself was
143
William Cooper Nell, “Progress of Justice and Equality,” The Liberator, Feb. 11, 1848.
65
racially prejudiced, but because the owner feared retaliation from racially prejudiced white
people. Two black gentlemen looking for soda were denied service upon entering the store.
Thayer informed them that, “‘it was his custom not to sell soda to colored people—if he did he
should lose all his white customers.’”144 When one of the gentlemen tried purchasing soda again
Thayer continued, “‘I cannot break my rule, for if I sell soda to you to-day, I cannot refuse other
colored persons to-morrow, should they call to purchase soda at my store.’”145 Thayer admitted
the wrongness of refusing them service but he felt he had no choice. If word got out that he
served black customers then he would lose white customers and possibly his business.
Colorphobia not only impacted those suffering from it and those it targeted by it, but also
colorphobia-free individuals seeking their fortune in business if white people decided to boycott
a certain store for serving all skin colors. Racial prejudice restricted individual choice and
freedom of business owners and customers; which further revealed the malady’s attack on
foundational American values.
While businesses played a crucial role in the community by providing services so did
clubs. Some, like the Sons of Temperance, rallied for specific reform measures or goals, while
others focused on community service and provided a support network for its members like the
Masons. The Sons of Temperance came under the scrutiny of abolitionists as reports of noninclusive lodges emerged. While abolitionists knew the Sons primarily promoted temperance the
organization had a darker side. According to abolitionists, a secondary aim of the Sons became
“the building up of caste and prejudice.” For a society based on social betterment, abolitionists
viewed blocking freedmen membership as highly contradictory to the organization’s goals and
emphasis on community. Abolitionist J.D. wrote about black men that, “He cannot at all, either
Gentleman, “Colorphobia,” For the editor of the Chronotype, Reprinted in The Liberator, Aug. 10,
1849.
145
Ibid.
144
66
as equal or unequal, become a member of a literary society of white persons… No matter what
may be the color of their skin, whether black, or white, or brown—we maintain that men who
can rise superior to such degrading and demoralizing treatment, have in their composition a large
proportion of the material of which heroes are made.”146 No matter how influential or successful
a black man was he could not gain membership to a white club—only an African American
branch if one existed.
J.D. continued his critique of the Sons by revealing colorphobia in one of the lodges.
Rev. S. R. Ward received a membership invitation to the Sons by a Mr. Pinkerton due to his
outstanding reputation and prominent role in society. The report described Ward in the usual
manner of abolitionist writing by asserting he was a “gentleman.” At first Ward received
admittance to the lodge but then faced expulsion on account of the revelation of his skin color to
the rest of the members. In J.D.’s opinion this showed that, “The treatment of the free colored
people in the Northern States, is only equaled in disgraceful and disgusting atrocity by the odious
slave system of the South. The one is the natural offspring of the other.”147 Slavery spawned
ideas of racial hierarchy, inequality, and white superiority; in turn these products created racial
prejudice and facilitated the spread of colorphobia throughout the North. Americans residing in
the North could not claim moral superiority when they were just as cruel and unjust if not worse
towards free blacks. Slavery was a labor system, and while colorphobia was a byproduct of it
abolitionists viewed racial prejudice as more damaging and debilitating to American society and
progress. The social atmosphere of the North showed that the intermixing of races would not
come easily without reform.
146
147
J.D., “Colorphobia among the Sons,” The North Star, Sep. 21, 1849.
Ibid.
67
Reports of colorphobia within clubs and organizations continued appearing in the
abolitionist press during the years leading up to the American Civil War. Before Ward’s ordeal
with the Sons black men faced exclusion from joining the Young Men’s Association known for
its focus on moral improvement.148 Banning black men from joining raised questions about the
institution’s morality if it did not practice what it preached. Another example of colorphobia
occurred even as the war raged on in 1862. Colorphobia kept Masons from “being one in
fellowship.”149 A portrait presented to the Masonic Grand Lodge and a presentation given
reflected on the country’s struggle with colorphobia throughout the decades using black soldiers.
A final example occurred thirteen years after Ward’s dismissal from the Sons. Edward Garrison
Walker, son of David Walker, faced the same situation in Boston. William Cooper Nell wrote,
“The hydra-headed monster, colorphobia, which happily has not been very active of late in this
city, hissed out some of its latent venom when Edward Garrison Walker was presented for
initiation in the Grand Division of the Sons of Temperance, October 15th.”150 Walker had been
guaranteed admittance but upon arriving for initiation he found himself turned away for being
black.151 Colorphobia spread throughout clubs and organizations focused on social betterment
and communal progress. Racial prejudice defeated the purpose of clubs and made members into
hypocrites. If the North could not rid its clubs of colorphobia, then goals would not be reached
and the existence of various clubs would be pointless. Clubs focused on spreading morality and
communal good faced an internal struggle when it came to skin color and ignored the American
principle of equality.
W.H. Topp, “Colorphobia, Interesting Correspondence,” The North Star, Mar. 16, 1849.
William Cooper Nell, “Presentation of a Portrait to a Masonic Grand Lodge,” The Liberator, Oct. 10,
1862.
150
William Cooper Nell, “Matters and Things,” The Liberator, Dec. 5, 1862.
151
Ibid.
148
149
68
Even entertainment and entertainment venues were plagued by colorphobia. One famous
individual in the entertainment world serves as the perfect example of breaking racial barriers but
also falling short and bowing to racial prejudice. Elizabeth Greenfield, known fondly as the
“Black Swan,” dazzled black and white audiences in the 1850s with her singing voice both in
America and Europe. While drawing mostly praise for her talent and ability to break racial
barriers Greenfield’s career did not remain picturesque for racial relations. In 1853 the Black
Swan sang for guests of the Duchess of Sutherland at the Stafford House in England. A white
musician supplied the music for her vocals, and the mixed race performance did not produce any
kind of backlash from the white audience. “English people and their aristocracy know nothing of
colorphobia, which is, peculiarly, the disease of the United States.”152 The Duchess had no
qualms about enjoying a black artist and neither did her guests, because the English had no
racially prejudiced feelings towards black people. Slavery had already ended in Great Britain and
the black population existed unaffected by the disease. Greenfield proved that talent and ability
were more important than one’s skin color with her performance for royalty. Why couldn’t
Americans feel the same as the English?
Two years after her successful performance in England, Greenfield earned a praiseworthy
review from “Communipaw” of New York. Communipaw, the anonymous penname used by
black abolitionist James McCune Smith, revealed information about how well her performance
had gone and why the singer became so significant for combating racial prejudice. Smith wrote,
“Bending not one whit to the requirements of American Prejudice, never shrinking for an instant
under the cover of an Indian or a Morrish descent, she stands forth simple and pure
a black woman… Having selected as her aim the divinest of Arts, that are requiring the richest
endowments of nature and the most prolonged and arduous culture, it was but a light thing for
152
Frederick Douglass, “We are just informed…,” Frederick Douglass’ Paper, Jun. 17, 1853.
69
her to meet Prejudice face to face and crush it.”153 Smith urged black attendance at the Black
Swan’s performances, because he thought by doing so black men and women could realize their
potential based off Greenfield’s success. Greenfield embodied the possibility of a colorblind
American society by bringing a diverse audience together. Black art and performance given by
Greenfield ended racial barriers and helped integrate communities in unsegregated seating if
even just for a few hours.
Greenfield’s success drew the attention of James McCune Smith because he strongly
believed in the power of black art. According to Smith, black art could destroy racial barriers and
serve as a social leveler. An individual’s talents and contribution to society should theoretically
outweigh prejudice based on skin color. The Black Swan’s mixed-race audiences proved talent
and art challenged white prejudiced preconceptions and blurred color lines. Audiences
themselves experienced this. Smith wrote, “And Greenfield’s singing broke the taboo that
prevented black men from interacting with white women: ‘colorblind’ white women sat beside
and conversed with black men.”154 Yet Smith knew a single talent could not completely destroy
colorphobia; but he hoped that a multitude of talents and characteristics white people valued
combined together could. At the National Colored Convention in May 1855 he gave a speech on
this issue and said, “The colored man must do impracticable things before his admitted to a place
in society. He must speak like a Frederick Douglass, write like a Dumas, and sing like the Black
Swan before he could be recognized as a human being.”155
Yet all the praise received by the Black Swan did not save Greenfield’s reputation with a
performance given in 1857. Smith & Nixon’s Hall in Cincinnati, Ohio, the most popular venue in
Communipaw, “Our Correspondents,” Frederick Douglass’ Paper, Mar. 9, 1855.
John Stauffer, The Works of James McCune Smith (Oxford University Press, 2006), 119.
155
James McCune Smith, “National Colored Convention Speech,” The Works of James McCune Smith,
May 8, 1855, 119.
153
154
70
the city, hosted Greenfield’s concert. Smith attended the concert and argued Greenfield showed
that diseased white people could persuade or intimidate black persons “to proscribe their own
race when it serves their turn to obey the dictates of white American pro-slavery and
colorphobia” when she allowed seating changes.156 The Black Swan allowed black seating in the
gallery only on account of a prejudiced white audience and venue. Many of the black audience
members felt disappointment, Smith included, over her decision. The Black Swan’s portrayal as
a symbol of hope for the future of the black population, and as a sort of hero in breaking down
racial barriers and combating colorphobia, buckled under the pressure of racial prejudice. With
her performance in Cincinnati she showed just how easily colorphobia dictated situations and
decisions of those pressured or targeted by it.
Religion & Morality
Other than public transportation, business, and entertainment, American religion served
as a widely debated and controversial topic regarding the spread of colorphobia. The United
States had been a nation of Christians since its establishment as colonies and it had grown
increasingly more Protestant over time. Though immigrants, such as Irish Catholics, challenged
Protestantism it still remained the dominant religious choice. With abolitionists originating from
a wide protestant background, the hypocrisy and injustice occurring in churches drew their
attention. Catalyzing a reformation of northern churches and religion, when they stood at the
center of family and community life, would in theory assist in curing colorphobia. Whether
abolitionists reported racial conflicts in churches, penned poetry, or wrote critiques about “negro
156
William Cooper Nell, “Colored Colorphobia,” The Liberator, Jul. 24, 1857.
71
pews,” colorphobia stood as a topic of contestation amongst abolitionists because racial
prejudice rebelled against the ideals and morals of Christianity.157
Abolitionists commonly wrote about their experiences with prejudiced churchgoers to
bring more attention to racial prejudice and its everlasting conflict with religion. In 1841
Frederick Douglass delivered an anti-slavery speech in Plymouth County, Massachusetts.
Douglass spoke of once visiting a northern Methodist Church. The day he visited the church,
black and white members alike received communion but separately from one another. Douglass
mentioned this in passing before tackling the topic of religious revival in New Bedford. Douglass
illustrated racially prejudiced experiences in churches by stating, “But it seems, the kingdom of
heaven is like a net; at least so it was according to the practice of these pious Christians; and
when the net was drawn ashore, they had to set down and cull out the fish. Well, it happened
now that some of the fish had rather black scales; so these were sorted out and packed by
themselves.”158 Douglass pointed out that while black and white people adopted Christianity, the
two races experienced and participated in church activities separately because of colorphobia.
Two things he witnessed while visiting bolstered his convictions.
The first event occurred during a day of baptisms. One black girl underwent baptism in
the same water with no complaints from white church members. Yet when it came time for
communion the black child drank from the same cup and this act produced an outburst of
colorphobia in a white woman sitting beside her. It had been her turn for a drink, but “…when
the cup containing the precious blood which had been shed for all, came to her she rose in
157
For examples of sources on American Protestantism, see Randall Balmer and Lauren F. Winner,
American Protestantism (New York City: Columbia University Press, 2002); Ira L. Mandelker, Religion,
Society, and Utopia in Nineteenth-Century America (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2009);
Margaret Bendroth, The Last Puritans: Mainline Protestants and the Power of the Past (Chapel Hill:
University of North Carolina Press, 2015).
158
Frederick Douglass, “The Church and Prejudice,” National Anti-Slavery Standard, Nov. 4, 1841.
72
disdain, and walked out of the church.”159 The woman seemed fine with other white people
sharing the same water for baptismal but the prospect of drinking from the same cup herself sent
her into a colorphobic fit. The second occurrence involved a girl falling into a trance, coming to,
and claiming she visited heaven. An old woman (whose race was not addressed) questioned the
girl about black people in heaven, and the girl biasedly replied with, “Oh! I didn’t go into the
kitchen!”160 Douglass saw the racial prejudice that tinged the child’s explanation about why she
did not see a single black person—she suffered from colorphobia at a young age. Even children
developed colorphobia in a racially prejudiced church environment. Did colorphobia not
transcend death and God’s kingdom? A common abolitionist rebuttal against anti-black
Christianity dealt with God. God created mankind and gave the black population their skin color.
If the creation of skin color came from God himself, what was wrong with it? Many antiabolitionists cited the “Curse of Ham” as why the black population was inferior and enslaved but
the claim was based on biblical interpretation (which always varies). Abolitionists thought that if
northern Christians cured colorphobia amongst their church populations then American religion
would no longer be hypocritical with all brethren equally welcomed. Black abolitionists argued
that African Americans belonged in heaven alongside the rest of humankind—not in heaven’s
kitchen.
Eight years after Douglass’ speech William Lloyd Garrison published a poem in his
newspaper The Liberator dealing with religious moral suasion and colorphobia. Poetic critiques
commonly appeared in newspapers for revealing the evils of colorphobia. The poem’s author
supplied a definition of colorphobia, discovered who seemed prone to infection, and displayed
mankind’s reaction. The poem implied that humankind alone—not the rest of the animal
159
160
Ibid.
Ibid.
73
kingdom—could be infected with colorphobia and asserted that God viewed race prejudice as
immoral. The most important lines of the poem critiqued those with colorphobia:
Would ye be just! mind not complexion;
Black though the skin, ‘tis no objection;
Mind not the color, all else right;
A man’s a MAN, or black or white.
This is the thought that stirs their gall, That colored men are MEN at all ;
And fix the things the best you can,
‘Tis not the color, but the MAN.161
White men and women suffering from colorphobia obsessed over a person’s complexion.
Racial prejudice rendered white people unable to consider black individuals as human no matter
their occupation in society or recognize the quality of their character because of racial
prejudice’s irrationality. Black skin signified inferiority, inequality, and lower mental capacity.
These differences found in the black population, according to white people, justified their
prejudiced actions. White men and women were adamant about keeping the racial status quo and
hierarchy in the North. So adamant in fact that colorphobia spread the more the black population
grew. The poem urged curing colorphobia by reforming the northern white mindset and by
focusing on the character of the man instead of his color. A further critique of society is the
author’s name itself—“HEZEKIAH HUMANKIND.”
Hezekiah was the son of Ahaz and the king of Judah in the Christian religion. Bible verse
Isaiah 38:1 teaches that when Hezekiah suffered from an illness he received a message from
God. “Set your affairs in order, for you are going to die; you will not recover from this
illness.”162 With much prayer God healed Hezekiah and for the rest of his life he praised God for
sparing him. The author used both a religious name and verse as a reform technique. By using
the name Hezekiah Humankind, the author implied that all humankind, kingly or not, fell
161
162
“COLORPHOBIA,” The Liberator, Jul. 6, 1849.
“Isaiah 38:1,” The Living Bible: Paraphrased, (Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, 1971). 559.
74
susceptible to colorphobia, and if they did not change their ways and repent, they would die, just
like Hezekiah nearly did. Through connecting racial prejudice to a biblical verse abolitionists
hoped for a better understanding of the stakes of colorphobia and for white repentance.
Image 1: Poem by Hezekiah Humankind printed in Garrison’s Liberator.
The same year of Humankind’s publication a church employee proved the poem’s claims.
An incident in a Protestant church displayed the hypocrisy and injustice of colorphobia because
of a racially prejudiced fuelled act instigated towards a new churchgoer. A black individual
75
known as an “honest man and Christian, a man of good dress and address, was invited, on the
afternoon Sunday before last, to attend meeting in the church in Hanover street…”163 by a friend.
A church sexton, mind untouched by the horrors of colorphobia, and harboring anti-slavery and
pro-equality views, placed the newcomer in the pew in which he and his family also resided. In
the next pew over a white man complained about the man’s presence and insulted him by
questioning, “What is that nigger here for?” Shortly after another man entered the church, and
upon finding the black man sitting in his pew refused to sit near him. Appalled by his fellow
Christians, the sexton turned his back on the colorphobic churchgoers, and left with his family
and the black man to show his disapproval of their blatant racial prejudice.164 The sexton and the
black man’s character starkly contrasted with the other church members. According to Hezekiah,
a man’s actions served as an important gage of character, and both the black man and the white
sexton’s family proved to be of good character. While Christian denominations focused heavily
on loving one another and treating mankind equally those with prejudice did not. The white
churchgoers forcing the black churchgoer out demonstrates how racially prejudiced persons
could not keep their Christian morals. If religious brethren sought true Christianity the
eradication of colorphobia must occur.
By 1853 the state of colorphobia in American churches remained debilitating. A single
incident helps show just how much racial prejudice had intensified. In The Liberator Garrison
published an article from The Hartford Republican. For twenty-five years a black gentleman
attended the same church. He had always been clean and dressed well, but also “always to be
found at his place in church.”165 But what was meant by “his place?” Editor Colonel Cicero M.
Barnett referred to the negro pew that separated white church members from black church
Frederick Douglass, “Colorphobia in the Church,” The North Star, Nov. 30, 1849.
Ibid.
165
Colonel Cicero M. Barnett, “Colorphobia,” The Hartford Republican, The Liberator, May 6, 1853.
163
164
76
members through segregated seating. One day, however, the black man challenged the racially
prejudiced seating arrangements out of necessity. The man had grown frail and old and could no
longer climb the stairs of the negro pew that was in the balcony. The white members felt
disgusted by his presence and informed him that if he could no longer sit where he belonged he
should stay home. White members held a meeting without him present and voted that only
during communion could he sit below; otherwise he must remain in the negro pew or never
return. Barnett declared that, “His heart was almost broken to think that in the midst of his old
age, his infirmities and afflictions, his brothers in Christ should attempt to eject him from the
Lord’s Temple, and he has never since attempted to sit with them.”166
A common theme in reported incidents of colorphobia, like the one of the old black
churchgoer, revolved around the personal appearance and financial success of those targeted.
Abolitionists always carefully reported on these for two reasons. First, society judged individuals
on appearance and especially the appearance of those already seen as inferiors. Black men and
women were always depicted as clean, orderly, and mannered. Some dressed just as well if not
better than white aggressors. Skin color served as the only difference in appearance that triggered
attacks. Secondly, abolitionists included the success of an individual from the belief that it
battled the stereotype of black reliance on the white population. A self-made man like Douglass
or Downing built their reputations and success on their own. If a black man and a white man
dressed similar and both owned successful businesses, what was the problem? Logically there
should not be a problem. Abolitionists hoped showing the crudeness and irrationality of racial
prejudice through presenting clear pictures of African Americans targeted by unadulterated hate
would instigate reform.
166
Ibid.
77
While American Christianity suffered under the plight of colorphobia so did the country’s
morality and values. Abolitionist W.M. Whipper wrote to The Colored American in 1841
expressing his distaste over the decline in American standards and values. He wrote, “As a
people we are deeply afflicted with ‘colorphobia,’ (and notwithstanding there may have been
causes sufficient to implant it into our minds,) it is arrayed against the spirit of Christianity,
republican freedom, and our common happiness, and ought once now and forever to be
abolished. It is an evil that must be met, and we must meet it now.”167 Whipper believed that
unless the current generation ended racial prejudice the country would suffer a catastrophic
social downfall. Colorphobia being anti-Christian, anti-republican, and anti-freedom conflicted
with America’s core values and morals. If colorphobia lingered and spread throughout the public
then the country would no longer be a real Democracy. The institution of slavery itself kept
America from being a true Democracy, while colorphobia completely destroyed the country’s
chance at being one altogether. To prevent America’s downfall and end its hypocritical nature,
Whipper continued, “We must throw off the distinctive features in the charters of our churches,
and other institutions. We have refused to hear ministers preach from the pulpit, because they
would not preach against slavery. We must pursue the same course respecting prejudice against
complexion.” By banning slavery in the northern states it effectively ended the problem of the
cruel and unusual institution. Approaching colorphobia by banning segregation and establishing
equality would in theory have the same impact on racial prejudice.
The same year Whipper denounced American colorphobia and sought reform one white
woman known by the initials “M.F.” heeded the call of ending colorphobia and reestablishing
morality in the North by becoming an abolitionist. Her time spent amongst the enslaved in
167
W.M. Whipper, “For the Colored American,” The Colored American, Feb. 6 1841.
78
Liberty County, Georgia spurred her adoption of anti-slavery principles as well as principles of
equality. M.F. recalled:
It was there, too, I was cured of that dreadful disorder of the mind,
rightly called by Mrs. Child, ‘colorphobia.’ By being constantly
with the colored people, I soon learned that they possessed hearts
and minds like our own, (a fact which many are not aware of,) and
that the only real difference is that of the color of the skin.168
After witnessing racial interaction in the South, M.F. realized that most of the North
suffered from colorphobia because of slavery in the South. She further pushed the idea of
colorphobia as a disease but also combated the common stereotype of black inferiority. The
black population she interacted with proved just as kind, smart, and capable as white people.
Through disproving stereotypes M.F. suggested racially prejudiced states would change their
views towards black men, women, and children and treat them equally. M.F. recalled the story of
one mistreated slave from her time in Georgia who found herself on the auction block. Her
experience convinced M.F. that northern states must be morally superior in comparison to the
South. M.F. renewed her faith in the North and claimed, “They are of too noble an origin, and
too high a moral sense, to be contaminated by pro-slavery doctrines, and wicked prejudices.”169
No abolitionist wanted northerners viewed in the same light as slaveholders, and M.F. believed
that the North having rid themselves of slavery held potential for stopping the spread and
continuation of colorphobia. The immorality of slavery had already been recognized amongst
northerners, and logically the next step taken should address black inequality. Colorphobia could
be cured if people adopted abolitionism. Doing so would reinstate their morality.
Colorphobia undermined democracy in the United States because it incited violence,
hatred, fear, and inequality. In such a harsh social environment, democracy, progress, and
168
169
M.F., “Treatment of Slaves,” London Standard of Freedom, Sep. 15, 1842.
Ibid.
79
betterment all turned stagnate. The London Standard of Freedom posed the question, “Can
anything be more deplorable than the social condition of such a country?”170 Social conditions in
northern states drew attention outside of the American abolitionist circle. “The canker of slavery,
and the spirit which it generates, has gone on from that hour to this, eating into the very vitals of
American moral life, and exposing the great Transatlantic Anglo Saxony to the derision of her
enemies and the contempt of even her friends.” The immorality and colorphobia of the northern
states destroyed society and reflected badly on a transnational scale; and attracted an even
stronger push for black advancement by black abolitionists.
Education & Black Advancement
Education served as the final area that abolitionists critiqued. In 1849 the black
community in Rochester, New York faced the ejection of black students from district schools.
The city hosted a meeting, and “The House was well filled; the unfortunate victims of
colorphobia and prejudice who were guilty of the cruelty and injustice of excluding children
from the schools simply because they are colored, met with merited exposure and reproof.”171
Abolitionist J.D. attended the meeting and recorded how most in attendance, all except a Dr.
Long, seemed in agreement that the treatment and ejection of black children must end. Part of the
problem of black children being kicked out of the schools resided in money—more specifically
taxes. J.D. wrote, “…the colored men have been taxed for the erection of District schools; and if
they had not, still the injustice of excluding colored children from the District Schools would be
abundantly manifest, while the children of white parents, who have never paid a cent of taxes
either for schools or anything else, are admitted freely and without question.”172 All children in
the state of New York from age five and below twenty-one were entitled entrance to District
“Deplorable Effects of Slavery on American Morals,” London Standard of Freedom, Aug. 1, 1850.
J.D., “Meeting against Colored Schools,” The North Star, Dec. 21, 1849.
172
Ibid.
170
171
80
Schools based on state law. Skin color was not distinguished. Legally and economically District
Schools were open for black children but the School Board kept children from enrolling. Black
children and students of all ages faced discrimination in the North and abolitionists sought its
end in public schools and universities.
One black abolitionist’s name appeared on various articles and letters regarding the
importance of black education and betterment. William Cooper Nell’s prominence in the
abolitionist movement grew in part thanks to his relationship with William Lloyd Garrison and
his fight for complete school integration in Boston (which he accomplished in 1855).173 Nell
grew more vocal as his passion for complete integration expanded over the years and as he faced
increased confrontation from white Americans. A decade before he successfully integrated the
public school system in Boston he gave a report on the education status of black people and the
colorphobia that prevented advancement. Nell started off by relaying a report written by
anonymous author T that asked, “Why are the colored people ignorant?” The black population in
America suffered ignorance because of their fellow-countrymen whom were white. White men
and women barred black individuals from entering college and receiving good educations from
their racial prejudice. For example, one bright young black man applied to Brown University in
Rhode Island but was refused, because “southern patronage would be withdraw, and some few
southern students would leave the institution, if the despised sons of Africa should enjoy the
facilities which are found there to qualify men for usefulness.”174 The white faculty kept an abled
student from attending their school only because of the fear that his skin color would offend
white students and they would lose money. The application cost him seventy-five dollars; he
subsequently looked to Haiti for an education. An American-born black person could not receive
173
Donald M. Jacobs, William Cooper Nell: Selected Writings 1832-1874 (Baltimore: Black Classic
Press, 2002), xxxii.
174
William Cooper Nell, “Colorphobia,” The Liberator, Oct. 3, 1845.
81
an education in his native country; he had to seek one abroad where abolitionists argued racial
prejudice did not exist.
In response to such an awful instance of colorphobia Nell wrote that it served as an
offering, “laid on the altar of slavery by the degenerate sons of the free North; and while they aid
materially in sustaining the guilt of their nation, at the same time inflict a grievous wrong upon
the individuals who are the victims of such treatment, and who, though familiar with, can never
grow reconciled to the discipline.”175 Again an abolitionist framed colorphobia as a product of
slavery that spread into the northern states where black individuals challenged the racial status
quo, and where racial prejudice served as an excuse for segregation and white supremacy
without the institution of slavery. Nell believed colorphobia not only hurt northern society but
also individuals seeking to improve their lives.
While Nell wrote a variety of letters and articles on various public spaces regarding
colorphobia education remained his main concern. Colorphobia played an important role in his
campaign aimed at ending segregated schools in Boston. Four years after his article critiquing
colorphobia in universities he penned an article about the various meetings held promoting
education and school equality. Speakers at the meetings ranged from Wendell Phillips, Charles
Lenox Remond, and William Lloyd Garrison. Nell reported that Remond believed the black
population did not do enough for fighting against slavery and its byproducts of segregation and
colorphobia, while Garrison spoke freely by giving praise to those supporting educational reform
and rebuked those who did not. Nell believed colorphobia victims, “who, for selfish and wicked
reasons, oppose the ingress of colored children to the public schools” acted as a detriment not
only to the black population but also to all of society.176 According to Nell, “The equality of
175
176
Ibid.
William Cooper Nell, “Continuation of Equal School Rights Meetings,” The Liberator, Dec. 14, 1849.
82
school rights was of vital importance, not only to the proscribed class, but to the whole people;
for the present system fostered prejudices in the breasts of those whose associations would
otherwise prompt them to mingle together, and thus exhibit a most prominent feature in the
design of common school education.”177 Opposing black enrollment and intermixed schooling
not only facilitated colorphobia in the upcoming generation but also damaged America’s
potential for improvement by supplying black children with a poorer education. Nell believed
repressing a large part of the population from a good education would damage the country’s
future success.
A year before school integration in Boston, Nell reported on a court case and critiqued its
outcome as one born of colorphobia. Wm. T. Pindall sued the city of Boston over his son being
banned from school on the basis of race. Pindall enrolled his mixed-race, fair-skinned six-yearold son in an all-white primary school; a few weeks after his enrollment the school expelled him
and sent him to an all-black school. Pindall sued for $500 and his son’s readmission. Of this trial
Nell wrote, “When the child of a tax-paying citizen knocks at the door for a public school of
admission, the consent is held in abeyance until the scales of colorphobia determine whether, ‘in
the estimation of a hair,’ his rights to common-school instruction may not have been
confiscated.”178 By writing a report on the current court case Nell hoped to gain support for
Pindall, critiqued the school system and strove for educational equality. Pindall’s child barely
looked black, and yet he was denied a good education. Nell pushed for equal school rights in
Boston for removing the “stigma” of prejudice and colorphobia from the city when other
Massachusetts schools already started doing so.179
177
Ibid.
William Cooper Nell, “Equal School Rights in Boston,” The Liberator, Nov. 10, 1854.
179
Ibid.
178
83
Two years following Pindall’s court case, Nell reported on two black teenage girls’
exclusion from high school. The two girls were among the best scholars of their teacher’s class
and expected admission after taking tests with other white students. All of the class passed and
gained admission except the black girls.180 The committee’s admittance of every white student,
even those less academically strong, prompted the belief the committee teemed with colorphobia.
After The Telegraph reported this injustice, O.C. Everett, a member of the school board, wrote
The Telegraph defending their decision. The response from Everett set off a conversation back
and forth between a newspaper writer and Everett. After the conversation finished, Nell
concluded, “…these candidates were excluded, not for their educational deficiencies. So much
for the American crime of color…”181 Board members unjustly kept the girls from receiving a
better education because they suffered from racial prejudice. By keeping the girls out of school,
the board believed they protected the white student population from black influence and kept the
racial status quo. Nell immediately saw their colorphobia as an excuse for robbing the girls of
equal opportunity and a brighter future.
Five years after the committee’s decision an article pushing for educational rights entitled
“The Educational Wants of the Free Colored People, 1859,” by M.H. Freeman on black children
and education appeared in the Anglo-African Magazine. Freeman argued black children needed a
strong education for playing a good role in society, and advancing themselves through
knowledge, combating prejudice, and adding to the anti-slavery cause.182 According to Freeman,
“children are stern moralists, and there is no deeper hatred of injustice and wrong than that which
William Cooper Nell, “COLORPHOBIA IN THE CHARLESTOWN SCOOL COMMITTEE,” The
Liberator, May 9, 1856.
181
Ibid.
182
M.H. Freeman, “The Educational Wants of the Free Colored People, 1859,” Equity & Excellence in
Education, 10, no. 1 (Reprinted in 1972).
180
84
throbs and glows in the bosom of a child.”183 Essentially, children are born pure and moral.
Society, the environment, parental guidance, and teachings spurred the development of ideals
and outlooks that mirrored that of their parents and their surrounding society. Black children who
received quality education and had good examples of role models were better equipped with
knowledge of racial prejudice. “If then the child is once brought to understand the wrong and
injustice of slavery and colorphobia, there is no fear the he will ‘envy the oppressor or desire any
of his ways.’”184
Equal education remained important but Freeman believed a good, strong education gave
black children the tools needed for fighting colorphobia. Just like black children are born moral
and typically adopt views of their parents, white children undergo the same process. If schools
were non-segregated and equal, and racial inferiority was not instilled into them from a young
age, then defeating colorphobia would work from not only abolitionism, but also education and
proper teaching. If children, regardless of race, could properly understand the ills of slavery and
colorphobia, then inoculation could occur before colorphobia spread to the next generation.
Publishing reports and critiques on schools and education helped abolitionists promote equal
education, further the next generation, and critique adults that denied children a basic right as a
consequence of their colorphobia.
Other than public schools and universities, black advancement and betterment in the
1850s became popular topics for combating colorphobia. If the black population educated itself,
and focused on advancing their knowledge and kinds of employment, then disputing claims of
intellectual, mental, and work ethic inferiority became possible. The only drawback abolitionists
foresaw in black advancement originated from the need of white financial aid and moral support.
183
184
Ibid., 34.
Ibid., 34.
85
Joseph C. Holly sent a letter to Frederick Douglass’ Newspaper about white support. Holly
wrote, “Whilst our improvement mainly depends upon our own efforts, yet there is much that our
friends can do for us besides expressing their abhorrence of slavery and
disapprobation of prejudice. They possess the capital and natural resources of the country.”185
Holly felt that while education slowly improved employment had not. To gain success black
Americans needed better employment with better pay. Agriculture and husbandry, mechanical
branches, mercantile pursuits, and the learned professions all served as jobs that helped combat
colorphobia. Holly claimed, “I do not ask charity for the colored people, but that they be
afforded the means of employing their talents, skill and industry.” In a job market that
discriminated against black people and kept them inferior colorphobia ran rampant. Through
opening up jobs, allowing black workers to prove themselves as equals, and white people lending
support Holly thought racial prejudice would end.
Holly sent his letter in August of 1851 but Douglass published it in his newspaper about
two months later. Less than a month after Douglass’ publishing another letter dealing with black
advancement and personal betterment appeared. This time it came from Glasgow commenting on
the state of white racial prejudice and black status in the United States. E.B. opened the letter by
stating, “The insensate antipathy nourished by the men of the American States toward the free
men of color, is so base, and the insult it stimulates so cowardly, one is forced to suspect that the
physiological structure of an American white man to be too indurated for the benign influence of
civilization, seeing that they are strangers to the amenities and manners of polished society;
indeed this morbid aversion to particular colors is an approximation to the dislike of many of the
low animals.”186 Racially prejudiced white Americans commonly compared the black population
185
186
Joseph C. Holly, “Help for the Colored People,” Frederick Douglass’ Paper, Oct. 9, 1851.
E.B., “Colorphobia,” Frederick Douglass’ Paper, Oct. 23, 1851.
86
to animals. E.B. took their point of view and flipped it by comparing racially prejudiced whites
to animals as a means of mockery and shaming them. According to E.B., skin color served as the
only difference between white people and black people and fear served as the leading cause of
colorphobia. “The men of color are one by one rising to the level of the white race alarm is felt
lest, with fair play and advantages, they may yet rise above this level.” Freedmen threatened the
northern white population where slaves did not. As freedmen worked on bettering themselves
and their status in society white racial prejudice grew. Segregation combined with colorphobia in
the North became a tool for domination without enslavement.
If black people successfully tackled colorphobia they advanced in society. An article
written for Garrison by William Cooper Nell showed black progress began working by 1856.
Reports of black men owning successful businesses and finding good employment revealed that
colorphobia could be beaten by improving and changing white opinion on the black population
and by giving black citizens their rights. For example, two black men owned a coal yard, while
black market men and grocers rapidly appeared across Cincinnati. Much like the earlier
argument for white Americans helping black Americans, Nell believed, “The colored American
confidently relies upon the aid of his friends, but will ever be zealous and progressive
himself.”187 Black men throughout Cincinnati successfully started businesses and made names
for themselves based on hard work and perseverance. However, this had not always been the
case. Black men and women had dealt with mobs of northerners riled up and seething with
colorphobia for decades. “These mobs were instigated by Northern men, who, with ‘South-side
views,’ deemed knowledge in the head, the love of liberty in the heart, and weapons in the hands,
as a combination of elements altogether too dangerous to be possessed by colored Americans.”188
187
188
William Cooper Nell, “A Recent Tour in Ohio,” The Liberator, Nov. 21, 1856.
Ibid.
87
While black Americans were nowhere near equal to white Americans there had been some
improvement in employment, skills, opportunity, and treatment in Cincinnati. The state of
Massachusetts practically led other states in curing colorphobia but still did not allow black
juries and military service remained complicated. Yet the advancement, betterment, and
education of black individuals proved their willingness to elevate themselves and the capability
to contribute in northern society. By asserting themselves in the community, the black population
combated colorphobia through challenging racial status quos, working their way up in business,
seeking better educations, and showing they could be just as successful or more as white people.
Abolitionism and the implementation of equal rights combated colorphobia but so did black
advancement.
88
Chapter 3
Impact of Colorphobia
On October 12, 1839 one of Washington, D.C.’s local newspapers, The Native American,
revealed the latest disease sweeping a small northern minority. Editor J. Elliot Jr. wrote,
“‘Negrophobia,’ is the latest name given to the disease of abolition—it is decidedly worse than
hydrophobia.”189 Originally, “negrophobia” appeared interchangeably with colorphobia in
abolitionist texts and speeches critiquing racially prejudiced white society. However, through
anti-abolitionist adoption negrophobia became the “disease of abolition”—or an affliction that
caused anti-slavery and pro-equality views. Anti-abolitionists took negrophobia from the
abolitionist agenda to insinuate that abolitionists were crazed and obsessed over elevating the
black population at the expense of white Americans, and used the disease for justifying their
preference for racial inequality, white hierarchy, and even slavery. By suggesting that
abolitionists suffered from “negro on the brain,” anti-abolitionists could not only defend their
views, but also discredit abolitionists by terming such a small number of the population as
socially unacceptable and dangerous for the success of white society.
This chapter argues that while abolitionists used colorphobia for pointing out the ills of a
racially prejudiced white society and revealing segments of public space that needed reform,
anti-abolitionists used negrophobia for denouncing abolitionism, and providing social
commentary on the increased free black population, and what they believed were the
ramifications of ending slavery and the potential horrors of giving equal rights to African
Americans. By keeping black people beneath the white population, anti-abolitionists believed
they protected white society from its social and political downfall. Anti-abolitionists used
negrophobia as a critiquing device against abolitionist values and focused on the areas of society
189
J. Elliot Jr., “Negrophobia,” The Native American, Oct. 12, 1839.
89
where abolitionists sought equality. Topics such as black voting, politics, mixed schools, and
American religion were just some of what anti-abolitionists concentrated on in their argument for
continuity in race relations. The chapter also argues that Britain and Canada joined the fight
against colorphobia. British abolitionists joined American abolitionists in denouncing racial
prejudice by reporting on colorphobic events and individuals but also lent support in the
promotion of equal rights. Canada feared colorphobia as it spread into provinces and undermined
the country’s freedom and equality. The spread of colorphobia into Canada reveals how racial
prejudice developed and evolved out of specific populations, and social tensions and
environments. Its spread also disproved the claim that colorphobia strictly resided in America.
Instead, racial prejudice could develop anywhere under the right circumstances.
Anti-abolitionist Use of Negrophobia
Anti-abolitionists were northern whites that were anti-abolition and pro-slavery. They
concerned themselves with rebuking the claims and goals of abolitionists, but also with driving
abolitionists away and ending their movement entirely. One way they tried doing so was by
adopting negrophobia. While anti-abolitionists established negrophobia as the disease of
abolition as early as 1839, its use heavily increased in the 1850s and 1860s as racial tensions
increased. The Red Wing Sentinel, founded in Minnesota by outspoken Democrat William
Colvill Jr., published an article showcasing white anxieties about the black population and
abolitionists. The introduction of bills to the Minnesota Legislature prohibiting slavery in the
Minnesota territory occurred in 1856. Colvill disliked how the Legislature focused on the
Kansas-Nebraska Act because he felt it did not directly impact the Minnesota territory. Instead
negrophobia should be their greatest concern—even if Colvill thought the disease would not
90
fully manifest. He wrote about how local weather and climate could “cure” symptoms of
negrophobia; which made the territory appealing to anti-abolitionists.
Minnesota’s environment fostered the perfect white haven. Colvill claimed, “This winter
has been so severe that every negro will go down the river on the first boat never to return. The
occupation of the Black Republican in Minnesota will then begone forever.”190 Colvill played on
stereotypical beliefs about the black population. Much of the white population believed that the
darker skin a person had the better they worked in hot and humid environments, and that black
people needed warmer environments to thrive. Their ancestors originating from Africa made
outside work easier, and black slaves did not tire as quickly as white workers with fair skin.
Black people were naturally superior for agricultural work from their genetic make up. Because
of this Colvill believed free blacks and runaway slaves would not survive cold weather in
Minnesota. Cold environments would not only keep black persons away but also abolitionists.
Just as abolitionists believed high black populations induced colorphobia, anti-abolitionists
believed a lack of black people kept negrophobia from developing. According to Colvill,
negrophobia only developed if an area had a high black population. Abolitionists lived in cities
with freedmen and free blacks; otherwise their misguided goal of promoting anti-slavery and
pro-equality served no purpose. The lack of a substantial black population kept negrophobia out
of the territory and abolitionism ceased spreading into the West—at least in Minnesota. By
driving away black populations, anti-abolitionists combatted negrophobia and its encroachment
into white territories.
Anti-abolitionists believed the western Minnesota Territory remained protected from the
spread of negrophobia and the black population. However, Greene County, Ohio had less luck.
On August 11, 1858 the Cadiz Democratic Sentinel published an article by the anonymous
190
William Colvill Jr., “Slavery in Minoesota,” The Red Wing Sentinel, Feb. 9, 1856.
91
author Tempora mutantur—Statesman. The author’s name when translated is Latin for “times
change” and it reveals the atmosphere of the North. The bitter fight between abolitionists and
anti-abolitionists over the question of the freedman’s future challenged, shaped, and changed
northern racial relations. As the black population expanded and tensions flared, abolitionism and
black treatment became harder to ignore. Some states like Massachusetts were quicker in
adopting anti-segregation measures and ideas while others floundered under tumultuous
populations. Anti-abolitionists believed Greene County supplied them with a glimpse into the
future after freeing and giving equality to African Americans. Negrophobia spread into a once
white community across all class, age, and gender lines. But why did negrophobia appear? The
founding of Wilberforce University served as the catalyst by attracting a new black population.
The establishment of a black university produced disastrous effects on the white
population. Anti-abolitionists believed the university brought negrophobia to Greene County as
the black population rose and proved themselves as intellectually capable. After numerous
reports surfaced of white families contracting the disease and adopting abolitionist values doctors
became involved. Doctors confirmed that the newly burgeoning black population and the selfbetterment they sought produced the outbreak but they also did more than that. Tempora
mutantur wrote, “Doctors after settling the cause of diseases, we believe, next go to work to
ascertain what they call the Pathology, or exact nature of the disease—in other words what organ
or tissue is affected.”191 The disease did not fester in the kidneys, stomach, or lungs. Instead it
resided in the mind and spread through the “germ” of black advancement. Not only men and
women contracted negrophobia. So did children. “It is in the mind of the white child, with his
first idea and his first look into the face of the black man—it lives through his whole life, and
Tempora mutantur, “Negrophobia in Greene County, Ohio,” Cadiz Democratic Sentinel, Aug. 11,
1858.
191
92
dies only when he dies.” The doctors identified the cause and nature of negrophobia in Greene
County. Yet finding a remedy that did not involve pushing out the black population and
dismantling the university became impossible. Anti-abolitionists feared the repeat of similar
scenarios across northern states, and believed it would lead to the ruination of a racially
structured society. While black advancement might have seemed ideal to abolitionists, antiabolitionists saw it as an end to their way of life.
Black advancement through voting threatened white lifestyles and supremacy further.
Well before the passing of the 14th Amendment in 1868 that granted citizenship to ex-slaves and
the 15th Amendment in 1870 securing voting rights for all citizens regardless of race,
abolitionists sought black betterment and representation through voting in the antebellum North.
However, anti-abolitionists held extreme anti-black voting sentiments. On August 22, 1860 the
Clearfield Republican published an article about the push for the “negro vote” and the disastrous
effects that would undoubtedly follow. The Clearfield Republican served the majority
Democratic Party in Clearfield County and fostered Copperhead sympathies.192 Copperheads, or
pro-slavery Democrats residing in the North, opposed the Union entering into war and sought
peace with the South. The newspaper’s copperhead views placed blame for the war on
abolitionists and printed articles against them. The published article first reiterated part of an
article from the New York Times.
The New York Times published commentary on black voting and discrimination because
of a property clause—freedmen had to own $250 in real estate before they could register to vote.
If black men had to fulfill a property requirement for voting, The New York Times argued, then
white men should as well. Publisher D.W. Moore of the Clearfield Republican viewed the outcry
against the property requirement and the pro-black voting stance in the newspaper as a product
192
Library of Congress, Penn State Univ. Libraries, Clearfield Republican, 2016.
93
of negrophobia. Moore wrote, “If there is one thing more degrading to the American people than
another, it is the fact that a powerful party exists in our mist which, or a majority of which, is
willing to sink the proud Anglo-Saxon and other European races into one common level with the
lowest races of mankind.”193 He thought allowing black men to vote would completely change
the political structure. White men would no longer control American society and changes voted
in by black men would produce more harm than good. Being the dominant race had its
benefits—why would white people want to lose them? After all, “God has not ordained the
distinct divisions of the human family which now exist, without some wise purpose.”194 To antiabolitionists, physical and mental differences between white and back people served as natural
separators and the divisions supported the argument for white-only voting.
If those differences were ignored and black men voted, anti-abolitionists feared disastrous
consequences as a result. Moore revealed one consequence with his continuation: “If the equality
of the negro is acknowledged, and the political rights of the white man are shared with him, a
mongrel race must and will follow.”195 Amalgamation, or race mixing, struck fear into the hearts
of anti-abolitionist individuals. In their minds, it endangered the purity of the white race and its
superiority. Moore and other anti-abolitionists feared black men and mulattos gaining political
power through voting and shaping the country into one that was pro-black and pro-equality.
Black people would assert an equal claim on America and the white population would become
victimized by the black race.
Other than voting matters, local elections stole abolitionist and anti-abolitionist attention.
Which candidate won and from what political party shaped how black treatment and the fight for
equal rights would play out—especially when it came to candidates who supported Black Laws.
D.W. Moore, “Negro Voting,” Clearfield Republican, Aug. 22, 1860.
Ibid.
195
Ibid.
193
194
94
Black Laws, or “black codes,” were huge hindrances in establishing equality between the races.
They were laws put in place to limit black rights and keep white American power. For example,
some black codes restricted black voting.196 Abolitionist concern with Black Laws and elections
increased in 1862 when the Civil War for the Union had taken a turn for the worse. With the war
failing in all but the West, some states turned positions of power over to Democrats instead of
keeping or selecting Republicans. Having a Republican in the White House while friends and
family died in a war without any victory in sight helped shift political support. In November of
1862, Democrats meeting in Hillsborough, Ohio selected Clement Vallandigham as their choice
for Governor.197 Vallandigham served as leader of the Ohio Democratic Party and held anti-war
views. Before chosen as governor he served two terms in the House of Representatives in
Congress where he rallied support for keeping Black Laws.
As soon as Vallandigham’s name was publicly released, the editor of the Dayton Daily
Empire, newly promoted William T. Logan (who took over after his predecessor was shot seven
days before the article’s publication), claimed the editor of the abolitionist newspaper The
Highland News became enraged. Logan wrote, “The editor raves and rants like a caged hyena.
But he is not at all dangerous; we know the animal. He has the negrophobia pretty bad, but the
recent elections will act as an opiate on his frenzied brain.”198 Logan accused the editor of
suffering from negrophobia and compared him to a hyena for specific reasons. Just like
abolitionists sometimes compared anti-abolitionists and slave holders to animals as a way to use
their own prejudice against them, anti-abolitionists used the same tactic for proving their
prejudices correct.
196
For more information on Black Laws, see Stephen Middleton, The Black Laws: Race and the Legal
Process in Early Ohio, (Athens: Ohio University Press, 2005).
197
William T. Logan, “On the Rampage.,” Dayton Daily Empire, Nov. 8, 1862.
198
Ibid.
95
Logan combined imagery about blacks and imagery about disease to describe
abolitionists. Comparing the editor to a hyena played on typical assumptions and prejudices
about the black population. Slaves and freedmen commonly found themselves compared to
animals in pro-slavery and anti-black writings. Abolitionists casted as hyenas lowered them to
the level of the black population, demeaned them, and discredited their cause. A “raving” and
“ranting” hyena also connoted an image of a mad and diseased creature. Hydrophobia in
northern cities struck fear into the hearts of men and women alike. Any kind of mad animal,
especially a hyena since its build and appearance was dog-like, scared northern society. Antiabolitionists hoped critiques against abolitionists would have the same effect. Laboring under
negrophobia and turning crazed when something got in the way of their agenda depicted
abolitionists as dangerous to not only themselves but also the entirety of northern society.
During the height of the American Civil War in 1863 The Bedford Gazette in Bedford,
Pennsylvania harshly denounced “negrophobics.” Local abolitionists critiqued the weekly
publishings of The Bedford Gazette and tried shutting down the press. According to publisher
Charles M’Dowell, the mere sight of the newspaper “causes them to rave and foam at the mouth,
as if possessed with some unclean spirit which cannot brook the pure principles of
Democracy.”199 The employees and founders of The Bedford Gazette ignored such criticism
from abolitionists and focused on their anti-abolitionist writings and other publishings instead.
M’Dowell continued, “These fantastic capers of these poor victims of negrophobia, do not
disturb us in the least, and no matter how much the miserable creatures may storm and rave, we
intend to pursue the ‘even tenor of our way,’ regardless of all their outcry and all their curses.”200
Bedford Gazette workers claimed they harbored only worry for the safety and well being of those
199
200
Charles M’Dowell, “‘Keep Cool!’,” The Bedford Gazette, Jul. 17, 1863.
Ibid.
96
incensed with negrophobia. Anti-abolitionist writings and points of view in their newspaper were
dangerous for abolitionists—it could kill them if they did not ‘keep cool.’ The only way to
survive was to “‘keep cool,’ if that be possible in the dog-days, with persons laboring under
attacks of negro-on-the-brain.”201 Heavy doses of “Sensation Pills” were also prescribed along
with Confederate victories and attacks against anti-slavery. If the Confederacy, filled with antiabolitionists, won the war or made major defeats against northern whites, M’Dowell hoped
abolitionists would back down and end their obsession over elevating the black population.
Suggested ways for keeping cool ranged from keeping ice in pockets and on coattails to
sleeping in fresh open air. The best way to keep cool, however, “would be to mind their own
business and let that of their neighbors’ alone.”202 Once those suffering from negrophobia tried
the cures M’Dowell claimed they would find themselves free of abolitionism. As a consequence:
Negrophobia will cease and black no longer will be white, nor
white black. Reason will return to her deserted throne and the
Bedford Gazette will be no longer poison, but nutriment, to the
mind now relieved of the nightmare of Abolition. ‘Keep Cool!’203
Once cured, the newspaper would provide ex-abolitionists with anti-abolitionist
sentiments and they would no longer contribute towards the destruction of America. Other than
ice cubs and keeping cool M’Dowell touched on various topics that concerned both abolitionists
and anti-abolitionists—like the war. The war resided at the forefront of every American’s mind.
M’Dowell placed the blame of the war on abolitionists mad with negrophobia because they could
not “mind their own business.” Placing blame of such a harsh war on a small minority served a
greater purpose. If negrophobics caused the war then all of the suffering that happened to white
201
Ibid.
Ibid.
203
Ibid.
202
97
Americans could be pinned on abolitionists. Such pain and brutality caused by the push for black
social elevation helped discredit abolitionists.
As abolitionists worried about America dying socially and politically from colorphobia
anti-abolitionists feared the same with negrophobia. A year after M’Dowell’s critique telling
white individuals infected to “keep cool” he reported on another case of negrophobia. On July
22, 1864 in The Bedford Gazette M’Dowell printed about a death in Middletown, Connecticut
from the week prior. The man had contracted hydrophobia from skinning a cow infected by a
mad dog and died. M’Dowell used the death for critiquing abolitionists and wrote, “In the same
way men are dying political deaths of negrophobia, having assisted in skinning Uncle Samuel’s
cow which was bitten by the mad dog Abolition.”204 Like in 1862 with Logan’s report on
negrophobics raving over the election of a Democrat and losing political power, abolitionists
continued being framed as mad, and damaged their image and political stance in America.
Abolitionists were so concerned over the black population and fighting for their equality that
they were ruining not only the country but also their political careers. While not explicitly stated,
it is clear that M’Dowell implied if abolitionists did not cure themselves of their disease of
“negro on the brain” they had no future in the country.
Politico-Religious fanaticism concerned anti-abolitionists from the impact it had on
church congregations, and anti-abolitionists feared that the adoption of the same negrophobic
outlooks and values destroyed the sanctity of religious institutions. On October 5, 1864 the Star
of the North, a Democratic paper originating from Pennsylvania, published an article by Col.
Democrat. Democrat grew concerned over the presence of three politico-religious fanatics
residing in Columbia County, Pennsylvania. The first, Rev. J. Milton Acres denounced all men
who disagreed with his abolitionist politics and called them “copperheads.” Acres claimed they
204
Charles M’Dowell, “A man died of…,” The Bedford Gazette, Jul. 22, 1864.
98
would suffer in a hotter place worse than hell. The second, Rev. P. F. Eyer described Democrats
as “men who resist the Draft.” Because of this outlook Eyer denounced his own father, “who is
what he never was or will be, a Democrat, a gentleman, and a Christian. Shame on such
hypocrisy.”205 The final religious figure Rev. D. A. Beckley held and led a political meeting in
which he praised the Confederate loss in the Shanandoah (sic) Valley. Beckley took the win as a
sign that Republicans would dominate over Democrats in the next election. Col. Democrat
viewed the three reverends with contempt and wrote, “What a trio of Preachers. And what else
could be expected of fools and fanatics—inspired by negrophobia. Oh! the horrors of ‘nigger-onthe-brain.’”206 Abolitionists were so badly influenced by their obsession of freeing and giving
equal rights to the black population that they cursed others to hell and beyond, criticized their
family, made the Christian religion hypocritical, and praised death and destruction. Abolitionists
argued colorphobia corrupted Christianity and anti-abolitionists claimed negrophobia did the
same—but with different goals and reasons in mind.
Abolitionists focused on anti-Christian traits, such as unequal and unfair treatment of
black people, which turned American Christianity hypocritical, while anti-abolitionists critiqued
abolitionists over how they treated those without the same outlook and opinions. Whenever
abolitionists tried lashing out at anti-abolitionists or denouncing the way they lived their lives
anti-abolitionists did the same. Anti-abolitionists not only disliked being targeted by a minority
they felt threatened the entirety of the white North but also felt abolitionists were not completely
perfect themselves—much like the three reverends. Adopting negrophobia provided antiabolitionists with a weapon designed for combatting social change driven by abolitionists.
Critiquing negrophobia displayed white anxieties about black equality and revealed the dim
205
206
Col. Democrat, “Politico-Religious Fanaticism,” The Star of the North, Oct. 5, 1864.
Ibid.
99
future anti-abolitionists believed would follow. Anti-abolitionists used negrophobia for
undermining abolitionists and commenting on the dangers of black equality and advancement.
A Transnational Front:
Britain & Canada Against Colorphobia
While abolitionists illustrated public instances of colorphobia in their newspapers and
writings to expedite reform and fought an intellectual battle against anti-abolitionists, they
attracted attention from across the Atlantic Ocean. Transatlantic travelers noticed colorphobia
while in the United States, and viewed the disease as specifically and uniquely American as they
denounced it. Britain claimed to be free of colorphobia, and noticed the hypocrisy of American
democracy, morality, and values by witnessing and hearing of mistreatment of black Americans.
How could such a country that prided itself on freedom, liberty, and justice condemn the cruel
institution of slavery in the North and ignore colorphobia? British abolitionists wrote about and
reported on colorphobia to promote anti-slavery, immediate emancipation, and racial equality in
America. They also used colorphobia to point out that the former British colony failed to live up
to its democratic ideals. Also, Americans traveling abroad noticed a lack of colorphobia in
Britain and confirmed British claims of no racial prejudice.
Well-known American abolitionists partook in speaking tours abroad for international
emancipation and pushed for curing colorphobia. Many of the experiences abroad, transatlantic
correspondences, and country comparisons found print in abolitionist newspapers. William
Lloyd Garrison himself wrote an article entitled “American Colorphobia” and published it in The
Liberator in 1847. Garrison wrote about the eminent abolitionist Frederick Douglass, his
treatment abroad, and black choices in general. The most telling part of the article dealt with
black people leaving the country for others without colorphobia. It seemed rather logical to
Garrison that black men and women fled to European countries where they were not subjected to
100
racial prejudice. He wrote, “In fifteen or twenty days, he can place his feet on the shores of
Europe—in Great Britain and Ireland—where, if he cannot obtain more food or better clothing,
he can surely find that his complexion is not regarded as a crime, and constitutes no barrier to his
social, intellectual, or political advancement.”207 Garrison claimed Douglass was a martyr for
staying in a country that denied him equal rights when he had the chance for freedom abroad.
Douglass stuck by his brethren, and was “surrounded by an atmosphere of prejudice which is
enough to appal the soutest heart, and to depress the most elastic spirit. Such is the difference
between England and America; between a people living under a monarchial form of government,
and a nation of boasting republicans.”208
British abolitionists held great distaste for colorphobia. With the superpower’s attention
on America there was mounting pressure to address and fix black treatment and the country’s
obvious hypocrisy. The English openly denounced and critiqued American colorphobia and
relayed their experiences with it as a support tactic. For example, On October 27, 1847 an antislavery newspaper The Emancipator stationed in New York reported on the racially prejudiced
experiences of an English Baronet. The baronet traveled to New York with his black servant on a
trip for his failing health. Yet when he arrived in America he came across an issue he thought
nothing about—colorphobia. The baronet suffered from a paralytic affliction and needed the
support of his servant at all times for walking, assistance, and even protection.
A.S. Standard, the author of the report, revealed the baronet’s ordeal as he explored the
city and gave a description of the servant to show his good character in typical abolitionist
fashion. Standard wrote, “His servant is a very intelligent coloured man, who has lived in the
Baronet’s family from his childhood, and is in every respect a person of good behaviour, who
207
208
William Lloyd Garrison, “American Colorphobia,” The Liberator, Jun. 11, 1847.
Ibid.
101
perfectly well understands his position, and is an excellent servant, and at the same time a
confidential friend.”209 With a black man who “knew his place” working in a subservient
position and assisting an Englishman of fine standing, his presence in public should have been no
issue. However, with northern whites suffering from colorphobia the baronet and his servant
encountered new problems. One day the duo walked up Broadway, but with his health so poor
the Baronet sought an omnibus to take them back to their lodging. The driver would not allow
the servant on the omnibus because he was black and moved on without the pair. After resting
from his ordeal on Broadway the baronet sought entrance to Barnum’s Museum the following
day. The ticket worker would allow the Baronet inside but only if he left his servant and took the
tour alone. Unable to do so because of his condition he found himself banned. These ordeals
caused Standard’s following comment: “If the Englishman should happen to be one of the
writing species, it is quite probable that he will be a subject of universal abuse on this side of the
Atlantic, for entertaining a preference for English liberty to American independence.”210 No
other country in the entire world, according to Standard, would have banned the Baronet from
public transportation or an institution of culture on account of the color of his companion’s skin.
With colorphobia unknown to most British outside of the realm of abolitionists he did not know
what awaited them. Colorphobia in New York cruelly kept a sick man from enjoying what might
have been his last vacation on account of its obsession with complexion. Free and open public
space only applied to white persons—but even some white people, like the Baron, were
discriminated against.
The following year the British press picked up on a story about colorphobia in education.
A young girl sought admission into a white school but was stalled by the disease. A racially
209
210
A.S. Standard, “Colorphobia,” The Emancipator, Oct. 27, 1847.
Ibid.
102
prejudiced man, on account of her skin color, blocked the entrance of Rosetta Douglass—
Frederick Douglass’ daughter. On November 10, 1848 The North Star relayed the opinion of
writer H.G. Warner of the anti-slavery newspaper the British Banner on what happened. Warner
provided general information about the event and supplied commentary. He wrote, “The chief
governess of the school clearly manifests an excellent spirit, and the children, too, are, without
an exception, true to the nature within them, which, unsophisticated, knows nothing of color as a
condition of human love and social intercourse.”211 A colorblind student body and governess
allowed admission for Douglass’ daughter. However, one parent infected with colorphobia stood
against the black child receiving an equal education. Warner viewed this instance as both
troubling and enlightening. While the father remained trapped in his racially prejudiced views no
one else harbored them. Warner hoped that the lack of colorphobia in the school represented the
general populace of the United States. Perhaps the disease did not effect most of the population,
but those laboring under its ill effects drew so much attention that it seemed a widespread
phenomenon. According to Warner, men like the one blocking Rosetta from school entrance “are
a blot on the fair face of America!”212 Yet he believed there was hope for America in the
upcoming generation that already seemed free of racial prejudice—as long as they did not listen
to their close-minded fathers.
Just as British abolitionist Warner commented on American events surrounding racial
prejudice, American abolitionists reported on non-racially prejudiced events and surprises in
Europe as news of what happened made its way to the states. The following autumn William
Wells Brown found himself popularly received at a meeting held in London for his arrival.
Brown and other black men visiting Europe on speaking tours all faced the same warm welcome.
211
212
Frederick Douglass, “H.G. Warner,” The North Star, Nov. 10, 1848.
Ibid.
103
Frederick Douglass writing on the way Englishmen received Brown penned, “It is a source of
intense pleasure, especially to the proscribed colored people of this country, to witness the
cordial and heart cheering reception extended to our colored brother.” No sight would ever be
seen in America unless held at an abolitionist meeting or rally. Douglass further declared that the
pleasant way the men were received in France and England “should convince Americans that
colorphobia is a disease exclusively confined to the American climate; that the colored man has
but to quit the shores of this nominally Free Country, and land on the shores of England, or on
the European continent, to have his manhood acknowledged—his rights protected—and his
person respected.”213 Being received so kindly in England showed that colorphobia resided in
America instead of in the hearts of foreigners, but two English sisters also helped bolster the
argument that racial prejudice resided only in the United States.
Close to a month after Douglass praised England for its outstanding welcome for Brown,
the sisters visiting America released an eye-opening story of their run-ins with colorphobia. The
first part of their story dealt with public transportation. In New York in 1849, an English lady
and her sister supplied a witness account of colorphobia. Frederick Douglass’ North Star
reported their tale of colorphobia on the Rochester railroad. The two ladies traveled with a young
black boy who was no more than five years of age. Some passengers unhappily inquired about
who he was, whispered, and stared, while another passenger inquired if the boy was for sale. The
boy thankfully stayed “happily unconscious of his color being anything to be marveled at, and
looked all his enemies in the face with the pure trust and confidence of childhood.”214 Once the
three disembarked from the train, they faced dining separately from their young companion,
looks of disbelief, and gossip from passing white persons.
213
214
Frederick Douglass, “W.W. Brown,” The North Star, Oct. 26, 1849.
Frederick Douglass, “Colorphobia on the Railroad and on the River,” The North Star, Nov. 30, 1849.
104
While the sisters never explained who the child was, or what they were doing with him,
they gave a further account of their experience with American colorphobia. During their trip the
ladies visited a blind asylum where they sat in the parlor and chatted with institutionalized young
women. Questions about the treatment of black patients produced an outburst of colorphobia.
The young women responded in anger and explained that while they were black patients in the
asylum, their number remained low, and they received treatment separately from the white
population. Douglass relayed:
Then followed, on the part of these young ladies, a simultaneous
burst of indignation against the colored people in general,
suppressed murmurs that they had ever been brought from Africa,
the trouble they cause in this country, and vehement declarations
that they would never sit at table with colored people and on no
account would they consent to marry one of them.215
Appalled at such a reaction to their question, the visiting women lectured the blind girls
on their sin and urged them to rethink their cruelty. Most shocking to the sisters about the
patients’ colorphobia was that even though they could not see black people they hated them.
Those with colorphobia suffered outbursts at the sight of black men, women, and children. Just
the mere thought of being near a black person produced irrational hatred. Perhaps the young
women had not always been blind and had seen black people before, or perhaps colorphobia in
blind Americans showed the disease as much more complex and easier to develop in a harsh
social environment than abolitionists imagined. The English sisters never experienced
colorphobia back home in Britain, and hoped America would change its views on the black
population. By publishing their account, the sisters hoped they inspired the North to become
more like Britain in regards to racial relations, and desired to help American abolitionists by
supporting them and giving information through the publishing of their experiences.
215
Ibid.
105
In 1851 George Thompson Esq. drew abolitionist attention while in America. Thompson
arrived in Rochester, New York and gave a lecture about reform in Great Britain and British
India. The Daily Advertiser slandered his character and tried provoking further hostile reactions
from the general public over his speech. Journalist Roch. Herald wrote, “Thompson had ‘violated
the rights of hospitality’ and ‘vilified and abused our country as a whole.’”216 Thompson publicly
denounced the American Fugitive Slave Law and slavery and also lashed out at American
colorphobia. The combination brought harsh reactions from racially prejudiced audiences. They
not only felt personally victimized, but also believed Thompson had attacked the American
government and the Constitution itself. On the contrary, Thompson did not denounce America
and its values. The United States entertained a hypocritical point of view of government by
having a system based on slavery and skin color. All he did was point it out. Roch. Herald
claimed that, “he has uniformly expressed love and admiration for all, with the exception of
slavery and its colorphobia, and the Fugitive Slave Law.”217 If America rid itself of slavery and
the ill byproducts it produced, like racial prejudice, Thompson thought the country would be
perfect.
While British abolitionists condemned and critiqued American colorphobia in the 1840s,
the following decade saw the rise of colorphobia in Canada. Just like in America, an increase in
the black population served as a precondition for colorphobia in the 1850s. Some Canadians
argued over how racially prejudiced certain regions were or if colorphobia impacted Canada at
all. Two black newspapers, the Provincial Freeman and the Voice of the Fugitive dominated the
conversation in the 1850s and even into the early 1860s. With increased black persons in
provinces and Americans holding racially prejudiced sentiments, Canadians found themselves
216
217
Roch. Herald, “Baseness and Mendacity,” The North Star, Mar. 20, 1851.
Ibid.
106
falling victim to the disease. A country that previously claimed itself colorphobia-free before the
sudden influxes in the 1850s found itself immersed in the racial drama of the United States.
As black people entered Canada to leave slavery behind, escape the Fugitive Slave Law
that allowed for the return of runaway slaves residing in the North, and start new lives,
colorphobia appeared in black Canadian newspapers. On May 21, 1851 the first black newspaper
in Canada founded by Henry C. Bibb, The Voice of the Fugitive, released an article claiming
colorphobia resided in the country. Bibb wrote, “This most obnoxious and fatal disease has made
its way into this province where it is destined to make havoc among the ignorant and vicious if a
speedy remedy is not applied.”218 The disease seemed especially potent to lower class whites
already targeted by the powerful and rich. Bibb defined colorphobia as a “contagious disease.”
He stated, “It is more destructive to the mind than to the body. It goes hard with a person who is
a little nervous. It makes them froth and foam as if the Bengal Tiger was in them.”219 Various
symptoms could appear during an outbreak. Sometimes those with the disease would cry out
“nigger” or “darkey.” Sometimes they would “quack like crows.” Perhaps Bibb’s most revealing
bit of information about the disease came from the revelation of what kind of situations it
appeared in. Bibb wrote, “It excites them awfully when colored passengers enter the rail cars or
stage coaches, but not when they come in the capacity of waiters of servants.”220 Like in
America, Canadians remained perfectly calm around freedmen in positions of servitude, because
it made them feel at ease in their racial superiority.
As racial prejudice spread its impact on children became a concern. But how did children
develop colorphobia in Canada? They did so the same way as American children. Bibb claimed,
“It sometimes gets into children through the wicked and unnatural teaching of parents… When
Henry C. Bibb, “Color-Phobia in Canada,” Voice of the Fugitive, May, 21, 1851.
Ibid.
220
Ibid.
218
219
107
they have it bad they will turn up their noses when they get near a colored person, as if they
smelt something disagreeable and often say there is a cloud rising.”221 Children developed racial
prejudice from their social environment. People were not naturally born with hate against color.
It had to be imbibed into their systems through lessons, complaints, and experiences. Bibb went
on to list the various levels of religion colorphobia also infiltrated and found that Canadian
Christianity suffered the same blows. All of what Bibb wrote frightened Canadians. How could
they protect themselves or cure themselves of such a vile disease? It was simple. Bibb claimed
that, “Anti-Slavery is the very best remedy for it. It will cure you of prejudice and hatred, and
prepare you for a happier state of existence.”222 Without anti-slavery and the further application
of equality the continuance of colorphobia in both the states and provinces seemed undeniable.
On November 5, 1851 Bibb’s Voice of the Fugitive printed a letter from Samuel Ringgold
“S.R.” Ward about the condition of colorphobia in Canada. Ward, a refugee slave from the
states, lived in fear of the Fugitive Slave Law and found himself surrounded by colorphobia on
public transportation. Steamboat workers in Canada suffered spasms of racial prejudice like the
ones on steamboat Saratoga and steamboat Rip Van Winkle in New York. Ward reported, “As an
instance of Canadian Negro hate, I took passage to-day, at Lachine, for Kingston. I could not get
a cabin passage, on the steamer St. Lawrence, which carries her Majesty’s Mail, upon no terms
whatever!”223 Half-a-dozen cabin room keys hung left unclaimed but the worker claimed lack of
room. A different steamboat on Lake Champlain, the Francis Saultus, provided Ward with a
cabin passage instead. Steamboat Francis Saultus appeared as the foreign version of Steamboat
Oregon with equal treatment and passage for black travelers.
221
Ibid.
Ibid.
223
Samuel Ringgold “S.R.” Ward, “For the Voice of the Fugitive,” Voice of the Fugitive, Nov. 5, 1851.
222
108
Ward believed prejudiced steamboats in Canada were actually a product of Yankee
America—their captains from the states labored under the cruel symptoms of racial prejudice.
Yet even the British vessels teemed with racial prejudice. Ward claimed, “But the St. Lawrence,
under the patronage of the British Government, and sailing upon British waters, with a British
subject for a captain, compels a black man to take a deck passage.”224 In an environment
surrounded by other racially prejudiced persons and situations not even the British stood strong
against colorphobia. Ward believed that, “The boast of Englishmen, of their freedom from social
negrophobia, is about as empty as the Yankee boast of democracy.”225 In this instance the
abolitionist definition of negrophobia applied and Ward brought up the hypocrisy of American
democracy. Only universal agitation would cure America and other countries of racial prejudice.
The following year Ward sent a letter to Henry Bibb and James Theodore Holly
describing the state of colorphobia in Canada, and the similarities and differences between the
disease in Canada and America. Ward believed that while colorphobia had spread throughout the
old Western District of the country he did not believe it existed in each province. In his opinion,
some abolitionists dramatized the extent to which the disease had spread. Ward wrote, “But I do
deny that such a feeling, is, or ever was so general, so universal, as those gentlemen represent it,
or as they would like to have it.”226 Like in America black people found themselves banned from
hotels, cabin passage on steamboats, kept out of taverns and entertainment establishments, and
even faced discrimination at parties and dinners they received invitations to. Religious brethren
and ministers also found themselves targeted. “A Methodist minister residing near Dresden, in
the Gore of Camden, invited Mr. Vick, a black brother, to his house to aid in some work. The
good (?) priest called on brother Vick, to pray at family worship, but when meals were ready
224
Ibid.
Ibid.
226
Samuel Ringgold “S.R.” Ward, “Canadian Negro Hate, No. 3.,” Voice of the Fugitive, Nov. 4, 1852.
225
109
brother Vick must not eat at the same table, with this reverend preacher of a ‘free salvation.’”227
Another black Methodist minister traveling on a speaking tour lacked lodging and dinner at a
fellow white brethren’s home, because of the color of his skin and the owner’s fitfulness over his
skin tone. Public spaces in Canada and America brought white and black people into contact
with one another, and as a consequence colorphobia manifested in each country on public
transportation and other public areas. While symptoms and consequences of colorphobia
remained the same, Ward thought there will still important differences in Canadian colorphobia.
Ward argued that they were two major differences in Canadian colorphobia. First,
Canadian colorphobia seemed decidedly worse than its American counterpart. Ward argued:
Canadian Negro Hate, is incomparably MEANER then the yankee
article. The parties who exhibit most of this feeling, are as poor, as
ignorant as immoral, as low, in every respect as the most degraded
class of negroes. In numerous instances, are they very far below
them.228
In Canada black and white individuals held power equally in politics and legal
circumstances. Black persons had their freedom in the provinces and Ward thought that made
colorphobia’s existence worse. In America freedmen in reality remained “demi-freeman”
without any kind of political, legal, or economical freedom, while white Canadians had no way
of discriminating against black people through political or legal means. Instead they only used
public space and public amenities for asserting power when possible. Ward believed Canadian
colorphobia stemmed from an imitation of American Yankeeism. Not only did Americans bring
the idea of racial prejudice with them but also Canadians themselves facilitated the spread of
disease. Citizens visited America and returned influenced by “Yankee cash, and Yankee ideas,
227
228
Ibid.
Ibid.
110
and deal out both, in small quantities around their respective neighborhoods.”229 America was a
rising world power, and adopting American ideals and practices looked appealing.
The second difference between Canadian and American colorphobia goes back to Ward’s
mention of political and legal rights. Ward argued, “Unlike the Yankee product of the same
name, Canadian negro hate, here has neither the current religion, nor the civil law to uphold
it.”230 In America if a black person faced discrimination in public space and sought a lawsuit
they would unlikely win. Ward himself only knew of one time a black person won damages
against a prejudiced steamboat operation. British law in Canada did not discriminate against skin
color. If black persons brought their complaint to court their claims would be heard and a trial
properly held. Even religion handled colorphobia differently. Ward wrote, “Not a single
denomination, have we in Canada, where ministers uphold or sanction this illegal and unchristian
treatment of black persons.”231 Religious denominations generally did not promote racially
prejudiced views but individuals residing in congregations did. In contrast, in the United States
preachers and even entire congregations fell victim to colorphobia. Although Ward found
colorphobia to be meaner than the American kind and challengeable by law, he did not believe it
would last. According to Ward, “The labors of the anti-slavery society, the improvement,
progress, and good demeanor of the black people will, in a very short time, undermine and
destroy this abomination…”232 Unless the press continued spouting prejudiced remarks and
instances, and the black population failed in advancing themselves, Ward felt certain colorphobia
would disappear.
229
Ibid.
Ibid.
231
Ibid.
232
Ibid.
230
111
With the spread of colorphobia into Canadian provinces segregation appeared on public
transportation. Anonymous abolitionist Norristown (Pa.) Olive Branch witnessed the change on
the old West Chester Railroad and released an article about it in the Provincial Freeman. The
newspaper itself played a major role in promoting black advancement and better racial relations
in Canada. One of the newspaper’s founders, Mary Ann Shadd Carey, belonged to a wealthy
black American family that moved to Canada when she was only ten years old. Being an all
black newspaper allowed for emphasizing abolitionist stories and sentiment, as well as
promoting self-reliance and independence among black Canadians and settlers. The publishing of
the Provincial Freeman occurred in the Province of Canada West, known today as Ontario,
where a heavy fugitive slave population settled.233 The old West Chester Railroad quickly
became a topic of contestation four years after the passing of the Fugitive Slave Law as the black
population boomed.
Just like the Eastern Railroad in Massachusetts, passengers on Canadian railroads faced
segregated seating based on skin color. In the past being white or black did not dictate where one
sat; neither did ticket price or class. Olive Branch, whose penname clearly symbolized the
abolitionist fight for peace amongst the races and victory in the form of ending racial prejudice,
wrote, “Colored persons are very carefully handed into a corner by themselves, unless they
happen to be acting in the capacity of nurses or servants. This ought not to surprise us if existing
in the South, or anywhere else in the world but in a region under Quaker influence like Chester
Country.”234 Why now did color matter? Other railroads in the area, like the Reading Railroad,
separated passengers by rates and smoking. The only explanation for the sudden implementation
of segregated seating on the railroad, according to Olive Branch, originated from the sudden rise
“Provincial Freeman,” Accessible Archives Inc., Accessed Mar. 15, 2016, http://www.accessiblearchives.com/collections/african-american-american-newspapers/provincial-freeman/.
234
Norristown (Pa.) Olive Branch, “Colorphobia,” The Provincial Freeman, Sep. 22, 1855.
233
112
of colorphobia in the region. Olive Branch, desperate to save the town’s reputation even though
it succumbed to colorphobia declared, “While on this subject of colorphobia, we might further
remark, to the credit of Norristown, that our new line of Omnibusses allows no exclusion of men
and women because they are not white.”235 Public transportation fell victim to colorphobia in
Canada just like the United States.
By 1855 the belief that “white Yankees” or white Americans also brought colorphobia to
Canada continued. C.W. Windsor wrote to the Provincial Freeman that no improvement had
been made in curing colorphobia. Instead it only increased. He said that Yankees are, “with the
fewest exceptions enemies to the colored people, of the most contemptible kind. Many of them,
white yankees, who came to this free country for more liberty; but who, true to their inferior
training, and dirty instincts, are carrying into practice her the same tricks, as they would have
done at home…”236 However, towards the end of 1860 and less than three years until the
Fugitive Slaw Law ended with the Thirteenth Amendment hope remained. A.H. Francis wrote
Frederick Douglass on November 5, 1860 about the status of colorphobia. Francis recently
settled in Portland, Oregon from Victoria. Francis had spent time in Victoria, Vancouver’s
Island, and British Columbia with a friend. While in Canada he witnessed the bitter tensions and
battles between the British and the Canadians. Francis, fearful over the disease sweeping across
the country, found relief in the English attacks. He wrote:
The great difficulty seems to be: the English are holding out the
hand of kindness and protection to the colored people. The Yankee
and the Americanized foreigner are taking it in high dudgeon, to
think they are for once compelled to yield to their prejudices, or
leave the country. The last election in Victoria was most
beautifully controlled by the colored people putting in and
235
236
Ibid.
C.W. Windsor, “For the Provincial Freeman,” The Provincial Freeman, Dec. 8, 1855.
113
throwing out at pleasure—our old friends Lester and Gibbs taking
the lead.237
The English had no colorphobia in Britain and supported American abolitionists in their
fight against the disease. Colorphobia spread into Canada, because of the growing black
population and American Yankees flooding the area with racially prejudiced views. The British
wanted to spur and enforce social change in regards to race and black treatment in Canada, and
white colorphobics wanted the English out of the country. A recent victory of the black
population leading the election in Victoria fueled the British further and sent the white
population into a greater rage as they felt pressured into either conforming or leaving. Francis
penned, “In relation to colorphobia, I must close by saying that there is a grand future for the
colored man in the British possessions on the north Pacific.”238 Windsor thought that with the
help of the British, black fugitives and black Canadians might escape from racial prejudice. Yet
fighting colorphobia proved harder than abolitionists hoped.
237
238
Ibid.
A. H. Francis, “Letter from A.H. Francis,” Douglass’ Monthly, Nov. 5, 1860.
114
Epilogue:
The Fate of Colorphobia
What happened to colorphobia after slavery ended in the United States? When the 13th
Amendment officially ended slavery in the aftermath of the Civil War, abolitionists hoped that
colorphobia might disappear. Yet although the black population gained its freedom, the equal
rights crucial for ending racial prejudice did not follow. Without the complete assurance and
application of equal rights, racial egalitarians lamented that colorphobia continued in northern
cities and beyond. Even after the passage of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments,
obtaining fair treatment and full access to rights remained difficult for black Americans. In the
South, matters of equality became contested as the region rebuilt, and white southerners
instituted Jim Crow policies alongside every day tactics of intimidation and socio-economic
inequality. For many commentators, who were mostly black, colorphobia did not end in the
1860s. Instead, the disease seemed to expand, and the language of disease continued to have
power as concerns about epidemics continued into the Progressive era and the immigrant
population grew. Advocates of racial equality continued to use the terminology of colorphobia—
even reclaiming the term negrophobia and returning it to its original meaning as a synonym for
colorphobia—well into the twentieth century.
After the end of the war, the words colorphobia and even abolitionist-defined
negrophobia still appeared in commentaries on public space and matters of every day life while
anti-abolitionist use of negrophobia seemed to disappear. William Cooper Nell secured
intermixed schools in Boston and Massachusetts that became leading examples of school
integration. However, not all public schools adopted equality and integration across the country.
For example, an anonymous journalist revealed the injustice of selecting H.R. Howard as County
Superintendent of public schools in West Virginia. The author claimed that parents wanted a
115
man, “who is capable and who will teach and inculcate the great principles of morality and
Christianity among the instructors of our youth and into our schools.”239 On the surface Howard
appeared as the perfect candidate for teaching morality and Christian values to young minds, but
in reality he suffered under the woes of negrophobia (used here as a synonym for colorphobia).
The author thought Howard’s corrupted outlooks would spread racial prejudice to white students.
Howard was, the author observed,
so under the influence of negrophobia that his mind is haunted by
these black specters by night and by day. When he looks upon one
of these children of Ham, he imagines he discovers a facsimile of
self and goes off into spasms at once, and cries nigger! Nigger!!
Nigger!!!240
The importance of equality and inalienable rights for black persons would not be taught
to white students. Howard would “tell them that the negro is not a human being, that their
children are little brutes and that you white children should kick and cuff them about like old
shoes.”241 In comparison to his visits at white schools, Howard’s racially prejudiced views would
cause open demeaning of children at black schools. Howard would remind them that they
deserved maltreatment and that equal rights were not meant for them. His negrophobia would
undoubtedly infect young minds and plant seeds for a pro-white supremacist future. Why did the
author believe all of this would happen? Howard worked for the Mason County Journal that held
unequal views towards the black population, and the anonymous reporter believed he harbored
the same feelings. Putting Howard and others like him into powerful positions would negatively
impact the struggle for equal rights and fair treatment.
Even attacking other newspapers for holding racially prejudiced views continued past the
official end of slavery. Editor Tim Ethridge of The Evansville Journal wished for “an antidote
X, “Who is H.R. Howard,” Weekly Register, Oct. 17, 1867.
Ibid.
241
Ibid.
239
240
116
for the negrophobia, a malady which has recently so severely attacked the Indianapolis Herald,
the Courier of this city, and other Democratic papers.”242 Ethridge believed the symptoms the
papers showed had grown alarming as the racial prejudice of its editors and writers. The Courier
worried Ethridge the most with its attack on “negro juries.” Ethridge and his fellow journalists
saw no problem with instituting black juries, and even offered assistance to the Courier and other
newspapers like it if they sought an end to their racial prejudice. Ethridge claimed that, “Relief
must be obtained soon, or the patients are ‘goners.’”243 Whereas persons with colorphobia
believed black juries would ruin the justice system out of spite towards white Americans or
misunderstandings, non-prejudiced white persons saw it as a chance for the black population to
serve their government and take part in a practice they were once denied. If white people failed
in overcoming their ailment they fell victim to a lifetime of misery and prejudiced attacks.
Six years after Ehtridge’s critique, an African American newspaper in San Francisco, The
Pacific Appeal, published commentary on the continuance of colorphobia in northern states. In
1873, publisher P. Anderson reported on black Americans seeking a state civil rights bill through
the New York Legislature. Anderson encouraged other black citizens in northern states to do the
same. Without a civil rights bill Anderson believed the continuance of colorphobia would forever
plague the United States. African American children still faced discrimination in schools and
black persons faced daily discrimination in public nationwide. Anderson wrote, “In view of
many other colorphobia and pro-slavery disabilities yet remaining, not by organic law, but by
arbitrary custom and prejudice against caste, a civil rights bill ought to be enacted in every
Northern State.”244 Even if New York adopted a civil rights bill and enforced it the rest of the
North would remain victim to colorphobia without nationwide adoption. The North still harbored
Tim Ethridge, “We wish…,” Evansville Journal, Nov. 6, 1867.
Ibid.
244
P. Anderson, “State Civil Rights,” The Pacific Appeal, Mar. 15, 1873.
242
243
117
racial prejudice nearly ten years after the Civil War. Anderson and the black population needed
to secure change through black activism and legal representation.
Even health boards operated under colorphobia. The first African American newspaper
ever published in Indianapolis, The Indianapolis Leader, exposed a negrophobic move by the
local Board of Health. The three Bagby brothers ran the newspaper and argued; “The removal of
Health Officer, Dr. T. N. Watson and the appointment in his stead of a white man shows the
contemptibly mean sort of stuff of which the majority of the Board is.”245 The brothers insisted
that Watson made a wonderful member of the board and did an excellent job. His ousting
resulted out of one complication—his skin color. The negrophobics on the Board did not want to
work with him and did not believe he suited the position based off of preconceptions about black
people’s intelligence. “The colored man who takes a step out of his way to ‘bust’ this Board
when the opportunity offers, will render a service to his race at the proper time.”246 Although
Watson did not stand up to the other board members a black man of a stronger constitution
hopefully would. Only once those with colorphobia faced challenges would change occur.
The North no longer held a monopoly on racial prejudice with the end of the Civil War.
Colorphobia spread beyond the North and into the South as a consequence of the collapse of
slavery. Racial inequality that was once enforced through the institution of slavery became
implemented through segregation.247 Two decades after the end of the Civil War R.H. Allen
published an article in The New-York Evangelist entitled “The Children of the Freedmen.” The
article centered on racial prejudice in the South and discussed topics ranging from schooling to
Bagby Brothers, “Negrophobia…,” The Indianapolis Leader, Jun. 5, 1880.
Ibid.
247
For more information on the rise of southern segregation, see C. Vann Woodward, The Strange Career
of Jim Crow, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001); Howard N. Rabinowitz, Race Relations in the
Urban South, 1865-1890, (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1996); Rabinowitz, The First New South,
1865-1920, (Illinois: Harlan Davidson, 1992).
245
246
118
colorphobia. Education remained an important topic amongst the black population postReconstruction. A large amount of black children resided in the country but their educational
progress remained weak after emancipation. The same racial prejudice and the rise of Jim Crow
prevented children from intellectual pursuits. Abolitionists strongly pushed for an equal
education for black children before the end of the war but free individuals still lagged behind
white children. Allen declared, “But alas! not one-half of this number have ever been to school in
their lives, for there are not schools enough to go around among so many.”248 Most still suffered
from illiteracy in the South, because their families needed their help managing crops. Black
children lacked time for education, because of a dependent work system known as
“sharecropping.” Sharecropping was a post-Civil War agricultural system in the South. Tenants
grew crops and gave landowners a portion of their profits in exchange for living on their land.
The system kept black Americans landless, dependent on white landowners, and in debt as they
continuously owed money to both landowners and merchants who provided credit to purchase
farming supplies. Sharecropping kept black people from economically advancing—and even
educationally—in the South.249
Children of southern freedmen desired an education, yet rarely achieved one worth
anything from the influence of outside forces and oppression. One female student wrote her
teacher, “My parents say that if you will take me in on a scholarship, they will plant small crops
and spare me the whole term, for they want me to make all the improvement that I can.”250 The
girl’s father spent her school money on a new mule for tilling land after losing their other one
and their crops failed from weather related issues. Many other students frequently returned home
R.H. Allen, “The Children of the Freedmen.,” New-York Evangelist, Aug. 20, 1885. 87.
For more information on sharecropping, see Edward L. Ayers, The Promise of the New South: Life
After Reconstruction, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992).
250
R.H. Allen, “The Children of the Freedmen.,” 88.
248
249
119
partway into the school term when their money ran out, or if the family needed them for crops or
help with younger siblings. Even when black students attended school the quality of the
schoolhouse looked dismal in comparison to white schoolhouses. The buildings were
dilapidated, and supplies such as desks and writing utensils stayed sparse. Schoolhouses served
as a means of self-improvement and social mobility for black children. Without obtaining a good
education or having the materials to do so, black children were doomed with the same fate as
their parents.
Allen continued her article by including what one child had to say about colorphobia. The
student claimed, “The presence of colorphobia is usually seen and felt in railroad cars, hotels,
and places of amusement, and even in the house of God. People afflicted with colorphobia
cannot even kneel together at the Lord’s table in Holy Communion, but the white man must be
served first, then the negro.”251 The girl found that colorphobia appeared in the South but also
continued its reign of terror in the North. The country teemed with racially prejudiced
individuals, who declared black people would have “no political or social equality.”252 Twenty
years prior, abolitionists fought for black freedom and equality and covered the same public
topics of education, schools, public space, transportation, and religion. Allen’s article reveals that
while slavery no longer existed in America, the racial prejudice harbored by the northern white
population still thrived with it also appearing in the South as a consequence of the end of slavery.
Abolitionists finally achieved immediate emancipation in the United States but failed in their
quest for curing colorphobia.
The United States military still buckled under racial prejudice during Reconstruction.
Black Americans sought full recognition of their time in the service while also proposing
251
252
Ibid., 90.
Ibid., 91.
120
equality in the armed forces. However, there were instances of African Americans using the
military for fighting back against preconceived notions regarding the black population. One such
example occurred when two black congressmen appointed two white cadets to West Point after a
competitive examination. The congressmen could have easily ignored their scores and sent men
of color, but they kept things fair while simultaneously showing that African Americans would
not abuse positions of power by only helping or benefiting their race. Publisher Linden E.
Bentley of The Donaldsonville Chief viewed the instance as an “example of liberality ought to
cure some of the extremists of negrophobia.”253 Just because the black population gained power
did not mean they would use it as a means of only elevating people of their color. The racially
prejudiced, according to Bentley, had no reason to worry.
Beginning in the 1890s, America entered into the Progressive Era and colorphobia
expanded to include more skin colors. The Progressive Era became a time for reform focused on
immigrants, religion, education, eugenics, race, and more.254 In a society promoting perfection,
where did the black population and even other non-whites fit into society? To many white
Americans the answer seemed simple. Those with non-white skin did not belong. For example,
the military still served as a point of contestation in the North and South. William C. Chase of
the African American newspaper The Washington Bee reported on growing negrophobia in
Florida. Black soldiers no longer resided in Tampa from the area’s negrophobic ways. Chase
denounced the town by stating, “We would prescribe an everlasting dose of good sense and
strong patriotism to remove the morbid condition of Negrophobia,” but at the same time he
Linden E. Bentley, “Two colored…,” Donaldsonville Chief, Jun. 21, 1873.
For examples of sources on Progressivism, see Michael Willrich, City of Courts: Socializing Justice in
Progressive Era Chicago, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003); Sydney M. Milkis and
Jerome M. Mileur, Progressivism and the New Democracy, (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press,
1999); Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform, (New York: Vintage, 1960); Michael McGerr, A Fierce
Discontent: The Rise and Fall of the Progressive Movement in America, 1870-1920, (New York: Oxford
University Press, 2005).
253
254
121
feared remedies were too late.255 Tampa residents served as a good example of the extremes of
racial prejudice and its irrationality towards military protection services.
About two months later The Richmond Planet under editor Edmund A. Randolph pointed
out unfair criticism of black troops by The Washington Post. The newspaper suffered an attack of
negrophobia, because it unfairly critiqued black troops and left out a critique of white soldiers.
The Washington Post claimed their staff held no qualms about black soldiers entering into war.
However, African American troops were hard to control, loud, obnoxious, they could not follow
directions and rules, and they ruined peaceful communities. Randolph complained that only
white individuals filed grievances against the black troops, and that white troops never received
such backlash from the public. For example, “The white troops at Chickamauga, Ga., were so
riotous that the state authorities had to threaten to take a hand.”256 Other white troops at Phoebus,
Va., Newport News, Va., Fort Monroe, and Camp Alger, Va. were also guilty of poor behavior
and misconduct. At Camp Alger “white troops not only were guilty of riotous conduct, but
disobeyed their commanding officers and insulted their Major General…”257 Why should there
be reprimands against black troops when white troops were no better and perhaps even worse in
behavior? If anything African American troops were complained about less frequently and did
not deserve negative press.
Colorphobia continued to permeate public spaces and public services other than
schooling and education, school and health boards, religion, and public transportation.
Newspapers during the Progressive Era focused on colorphobia in public entertainment like
plays, sports, and film. Black journalist and diplomat Lester A. Walton’s articles continuously
graced The New York Age, an African American newspaper, on colorphobia, race relations, and
William C. Chase, “Tampa is…,” The Washington Bee, Jun. 18, 1898.
Edmund A. Randolph, “Again Suffering,” Richmond Planet, Aug. 27, 1898.
257
Ibid.
255
256
122
civil rights. On January 20, 1916 he reviewed a play about race that depicted colorphobia.
Essentially the play “Pride of Race” told the story of a wealthy Yale graduate happily living
unaware that he was one-sixteenth black until he became engaged to a white woman. Walton
wrote, “Colorphobia, the most virulent and contagious of American diseases, an affliction which
so thoroughly saturates the victim with egotism and conceit that he labors under the hallucination
that the mere color of his skin makes him the superior of all in the sight of God and man, is being
skillfully diagnosed and treated at Maxine Elliott’s Treatre, where Robert Hilliard, one of
America’s foremost actors, is appearing in a most powerful and gripping race problem play…”258
Walton argued that the play made a powerful racial statement. Black men were men just like
white men. They had the same desires, hopes, dreams, and instincts. Black people deserved fair
and equal treatment not based on the color of their skin. “Pride of Race” showcased the impact
and effects of racial prejudice from the non-white point of view for displaying how it hurt the
black population, and also provided a supportive stance for equal rights—just as abolitionists did
in their newspapers. Whereas white Americans typically focused on themselves in race relations,
the play pushed back white conceptions and explored those of the black race.259
A few months later on March 30, 1916, the section on drama and sports in The New York
Age revealed racial prejudice in American boxing. Walton found himself disgusted by the blatant
lack of respect and obvious racial prejudice in the sport that brought down the quality of
matches. Walton wrote, “It seems as if our fellow white citizens, or rather the majority of them,
would much prefer to see a white American of ordinary ability holding the heavyweight title to a
black American of undisputed skill. What care they for standards who are victims of that most
258
259
Lester A. Walton, “Colorphobia is Diagnosed,” The New York Age, Jan. 20, 1916.
Ibid.
123
contagious American disease, colorphobia?”260 Instead of an African American man rightly
laying claim to the title based off talent and hard work, white Americans infected with racial
prejudice preferred a white individual dominating the boxing world. Whether or not the white
boxer actually deserved the title he won. According to Walton, the boxer received the title
because of his race and it kept the black boxer where he belonged—beneath the white man.
Sports remained an area of emphasis as decades passed. In 1939, twenty-three years after
Walton’s critique of boxing, Cuban baseball players faced the same problem if they earned
admittance into the big leagues. The California Eagle run by Charlotte Bass, the first African
American newspaper originating in the West focused on local news and black help, revealed the
injustice of colorphobia targeting new persons. According to the article’s nameless author, every
Cuban experienced the American disease upon arriving in the states from being non-white and
challenging white players. For example, Clark Griffith gave Cuban players tryouts at his
Washington baseball club training camp with hopes of admitting a few into the professional
leagues. However, he knew Cubans faced massive discrimination from the race that dominated
the game—white baseball players. “Put him against a lad who skin isn’t exactly a rosy blonde,
and sometimes the Anglo-Saxon will resort to a bean ball to see if he can’t turn the dark skin
pale with fear.”261 By the 1930s white persons with colorphobia deviated from holding racial
prejudice specifically towards black skin. Instead, now any skin other than white warranted
unfair treatment. However, Cubans facing colorphobia in baseball were not the first group
outside of black Americans victimized by it. In the early 1900s the Japanese faced racial
prejudice over the mounting concerns of World War One.
260
261
Lester A. Walton, “Willard-Moran Bout A Colossal Burlesque,” The New York Age, Mar. 30, 1916.
Anonymous, “Cubans Face Colorphobia in Majors,” The California Eagle, Apr. 6, 1939.
124
In 1917 Lester A. Walton moved on from pugilism and denounced movies for displaying
and promoting colorphobia to Americans across all class and gender lines. However, this time
colorphobia did not target black persons. Racial prejudice adapted itself to current fears and
anxieties of the country. With America on the brink of going to war white Americans turned
their racial prejudice towards the Japanese. Even though political activist and anarchist James F.
Morton, Jr. wrote to the editor of The New York Tribune three years prior in 1914 in favor of the
Japanese and anti-colorphobia it did not matter. Morton believed the current war had nothing to
do with colorphobia and wrote, “The fact that the inhabitants possess skins of a hue unlike or
own is totally irrelevant, inasmuch as she deservedly acquired recognition as a civilized
power.”262 The irrationality of fear and uncertainty spurred American racial prejudice towards
the Japanese no matter what activists or the government claimed.
The federal government framed Japan as an ally and friend during World War One but
the movie industry painted a different picture. Movies depicted people of Japanese descent as
enemies, spies, and anti-democratic. Walton viewed the nameless film and claimed it showed the
Japanese as a, “‘a silent menace,’ a sneaking, snake-like, treacherous creature, who made it his
business to secretly learn about as much as possible about the business of the United States. It is
obvious to those who can diagnose America’s most contagious of all diseases—‘colorphobia’—
that that this outbreak against the Japanese has been provoked because of the white American’s
color prejudice.”263 The federal government’s views and opinions on topics did not always
reflect those of the general public. Movies, however, influenced the outlook of audiences as they
gained popularity. White Americans no longer only held racial prejudice against the black
James F. Morton, Jr., “Colorphobia in This War: Correspondent Rebuked for Evoking It Against
Japan,” The New York Tribune, Aug. 7, 1914.
263
Lester A. Walton, “The Silent Menace,” The New York Age, Mar. 29, 1917.
262
125
population on a massive level but also those of any Japanese decent—especially first generation
immigrants from the island country.
Walton gave his opinion about the Japanese and the atmosphere of the country itself.
Were the Japanese in America suspicious? Walton believed they were just as curious and
interested in the country as any other foreign group but did not require extra attention. “The act
of the movies in seeking to inflame the public against the Japanese is indiscreet and untimely.”264
Aggravating an already on edge public with paranoia served no purpose other than to make war
seem closer than ever before and to tip off the Japanese if they really were spying on Americans.
Walton found that targeting a specific group of people in movies became an American
phenomenon—much like colorphobia itself. Walton claimed, “The white people have been so
greatly impressed with their own importance, laboring under the hallucination that the United
States could successfully defend itself against all invaders, that the nation has not been as
cautious as it might have been.”265 White Americans always believed they ranked above other
colors and races. With their dominance and the belief that God remained on their side they
remained safe from invasion of non-white countries. Yet the movies spanning the nation
impacted the Japanese like it would have black people if they had been the primary subjects of
the films. Some Japanese lost their jobs in the states. For example, many wealthy families fired
their Japanese help over fears of espionage. The burgeoning film industry knew the fears and
worries of white Americans and used them for profitmaking.
About three months after Walton’s critique over the Japanese in film a more general
critique of the country’s racial prejudice appeared in The New York Age. Contributing editor
James W. Johnson declared, “The American people are afflicted with a more or less willful state
264
265
Ibid.
Ibid.
126
of mental blindness in regard to the question of race and color prejudice. Many shut their eyes to
the injustices born of colorphobia, while prattling loudly about the blessings of liberty and
democracy.”266 Of course the American people referred to were white. If the disease did not
discriminate against white skin they saw no reason for destroying racial prejudice and reshaping
race relations. Abolitionists complained about colorphobia in a similar manner; but the hypocrisy
of a free country discriminating against a large portion of its people frequently made its way into
their writings as well. White supremacy continued into the 1900s.
Disarmament and immigration restriction swept the country in 1924 as Congress sought
limitations and laws after the horrors of World War One. Robert L. Vann, editor of The
Pittsburgh Courier critiqued America’s continuance of racially prejudiced ways towards the
Japanese with its immigration restrictions. Vann wrote, “If this country is afraid of any one thing
above another it is the thing known as color applied to peoples of the earth. Color is the rock on
which this country will, one day, split into seething, fighting units unless some intelligent agency
saves it from the present day color frenzy.”267 Already the country broke into two separate units
during the American Civil War, and fought over slavery and to many, such as abolitionists, racial
prejudice. What was to stop the United States from doing it again? What if the Union never
recovered? Yet this time it was not over people already residing in the country but foreigners
from Japan. The immigration law Congress pushed for blocked the Japanese from the country,
and Secretary Hughes feared it would destroy the success of the Disarmament Conference by
upsetting the Japanese Government. But the country had “anti-Japanese journals” and they made
it clear that the “colorphobias of this country want Japan shut out; and they employ language
266
267
James W. Johnson, “When The Blind See,” The New York Age, Jun. 14, 1917.
Robert L. Vann, “That Yielding Color Fear,” The Pittsburgh Courier, Mar. 8, 1924.
127
almost insulting to convey their feeling.”268 The Japanese were singled out in the bill instead of
lumped together with the rest for immigration concerns on account of colorphobia.
In an increasingly connected world some Americans feared the emergence of more
enemies than friends with the continuance of colorphobia. Vann warned, “If this country is
allowed to cultivate colorphobia and race hatred, with Japan as the target of its attack, it will be
but a question of a few years when the whole sentiment will find its way into other countries
where darker peoples live.”269 The American conscience shifted from only including the black
population to including the Japanese. Vann’s fear that American racial prejudice would soon
encompass more nationalities and parts of the globe came true with Cubans and others as the
decades passed and America grew more diverse. Racially prejudiced white Americans hated
having their supremacy threatened. Colorphobia or negrophobia continued appearing in the press
as late as 1940. The California Eagle published a poem by Dr. Edna Griffin in 1940 that
observed the state of American racial prejudice. Griffin composed the poem to include hatred,
Abraham Lincoln, the North and South, and lack of freedom. Perhaps most revealing was her
second-to-last paragraph. Griffin wrote:
There’s not enough religion operating as it should, Sincerely for all
races in America for their good; The curse of Colorphobia weakens
all that should be strong, And there’s no Abraham Lincoln to
correct the hellish wrong.270
Even by 1940 American religion remained corrupted by immorality and race prejudice.
Improvements in race relations were at a standstill, and no hope appeared on the horizon for the
Jim Crow South. Griffin believed men like Abraham Lincoln and abolitionists no longer existed
for fighting colorphobia, and the future of racial prejudice in the United States fell to another
268
Ibid.
Ibid.
270
Dr. Edna Griffin, “I Would Like to Sing ‘America,’” The California Eagle, Sept. 12, 1940.
269
128
new generation. The battle against racial prejudice heated up under the guidance of the new
generation in the 1950s and 1960s with the Civil Rights Movement, and racially prejudiced
practices faced two major blows in 1964 with President Johnson’s Voting Rights and Civil
Rights Acts.
Abolitionists failed to eradicate northern colorphobia by the end of the Civil War.
Colorphobia still invaded public space and daily life, and infected new generations through
social and environmental influences. Post-war colorphobia expanded from just infecting whites
with aversion to black skin to all skin colors except white as immigration soared and the country
grew. The impact of abolitionists adopting colorphobia and the following use of negrophobia by
both abolitionists and anti-abolitionists is hard to measure. There is no real way to gage the effect
of the use of colorphobia on the public. However, its widespread deployment by abolitionists,
Democratic, Republican, local, regional, and national newspapers suggests that racial prejudice
created real concern before, during, and decades after the American Civil War. Negrophobia
even appears in the 1973 version of Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary. According to the
dictionary, a “negrophobe” is “one who strongly dislikes or fears Negroes,” and a negrophobe
suffers from negrophobia.271 The definition chosen for negrophobia in the dictionary is the one
used by abolitionists. The continued use into the twentieth-century and the listed definition
suggests that abolitionists accomplished a lasting impact even though the term colorphobia did
not survive. Even though colorphobia did not endure, it mattered because of the way it impacted
the abolitionist movement and added to the abolitionist reform agenda. It also mattered because
of how it changed the way abolitionists viewed racial prejudice, and it revealed the mechanics of
nineteenth-century disease logic and use. Colorphobia allowed for the black population to not
“Negrophobe,” Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield, MA: G. & C. Merriam Co., 1973),
762.
271
129
only use disease rhetoric as a tool of self-empowerment, but it also allowed black abolitionists to
come together and assert themselves in a society dominated by white people.
Colorphobia or negrophobia still might be mentioned today in a general history class or
one solely focused on abolitionism. Yet they are not used in every day conversations. Even
journalists stopped using the terms. Why did the terms disappear? Perhaps the use stalled and
slowly ended as abolitionists and the generation they influenced died off. More than likely the
phasing out of colorphobia happened because of a combination of three factors; First,
abolitionists and their sentiments disappearing as the decades passed. Second, a new word,
“racism,” appeared in the American lexicon. According to The Oxford English Dictionary
(1989), the first use of the terms “racism” and “racist” in the United States occurred in 1932 and
1936 respectively.272 The appearance of “racism” and “racist” coincides with the downturn in use
of colorphobia and negrophobia in newspapers begging in the mid to late 1930s. Third, while
colorphobia and racism are essentially the same, the terminology of racism supplied a new
intellectual approach to the same issue; and with the widespread understanding of how disease
worked, the notion of colorphobia no longer held the same impact on white Americans. While
there is no obvious answer for why colorphobia and negrophobia largely disappeared over time
from the public conscience, in the future a new research project might shed more light on what
abolitionists termed a truly American phenomenon.
272
Alastair Bonnett, Anti-Racism (New York: Routledge, 2000), 10.
130
Bibliography
Newspapers
Advocate of Freedom
Anti-slavery Bugle
Anti-Slavery Record
The Anti-Slavery Reporter
The Bedford Gazette
Boston Recorder
The Cadiz Democratic Sentinel
The California Eagle
Chicago Tribune
Christian Advocate and Journal
The Christian Recorder
Christian Reflector
Christian Secretary
Christian Union
Clearfield Republican
Cleveland Herald
The Colored American
The Conservative
Daily Cleveland Herald
Daily Morning News
Daily National Intelligencer
Dayton Daily Empire
Donaldsonville Chief
Douglass’ Monthly
The Elevator
The Emancipator
Emancipator and Free American
Emancipator and Republican
Evansville Journal
Evening Bulletin
The Fayetteville Observer
Frederick Douglass’ Paper
Gallipolis Journal
Grand Haven News
The Hartford Republican
The Herald of Freedom
Idaho World
The Impartial Citizen
The Indianapolis Leader
The Liberator
London Standard of Freedom
The Louisiana Democrat
131
Lowell Daily Citizen and News
Lynn Record
M’arthur Democrat
Michigan Farmer
National Anti-Slavery Standard
The National Era
The Native American
New Hampshire Statesman
The New Jersey Freeman
The New York Age
The New York Daily Times
New York Evangelist
The New York Herald
The New York Times
The New York Tribune
The North Star
Northern Ohio Journal
The Pacific Appeal
The Pennsylvania Freeman
The Philanthropist
The Pittsburgh Courier
The Provincial Freeman
The Red Wing Sentinel
Richmond Planet
Richmond Republican
The Star of the North
Voice of the Fugitive
The Washington Bee
The Weekly Anglo-African
Weekly North Carolina Standard
The Weekly Raleigh Register
Weekly Register
Zion’s Herald
Magazines & Journals
Anglo-African Magazine
The Atheneum; or, Spirit of the English Magazines
The Boston Medical and Surgical Journal
Equity & Excellence in Education
The Family Magazine; or, Monthly Abstract of General Knowledge
The Medico-chirurgical Review and Journal of Practical Medicine
Books & Articles
132
Child, Lydia Maria. An Appeal in Favor of That Class of Americans Called Africans. Boston:
Allen & Ticknor, 1833.
“CHOLERA-PHOBIA AND CHOLERA ECCLESIASTES,” The Medico-chirurgical Review
and Journal of Practical Medicine. New Series. Volume 20. New York: Richard &
George S. Wood, 1834.
Clapp, D. Jr. “CHOLERA-PHOBIA AND CHOLERA ECCLESIASTES,” The Boston Medical
and Surgical Journal 10, no. 24 (1834).
Clapp, D. Jr. “HYDROPHOBIA,” The Boston Medical and Surgical Journal 27, no. 15 (1841).
Douglass, Frederick. The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass. Massachusetts: Digital
Scanning Inc., 2001.
Douglass, Frederick. The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass: His early life as a slave, his
escape from bondage, and his complete history. Boston: Massachusetts, DE Wolfe &
Fiske Co, 1845.
Freeman, M.H. “The Educational Wants of the Free Colored People, 1859,” Equity & Excellence
in Education, 10, no. 1 (Reprinted in 1972).
Garrison, William Lloyd. Thoughts on African Colonization: Or an Impartial Exhibition of the
Doctrines, Principles and Purposes of the American Colonization Society. Together with
the Resolutions, Addresses and Remonstrances of the Free People of Color. Boston:
Garrison and Knapp, 1832.
“HYDROPHOBIA,” The Boston Medical and Surgical Journal 27, no. 15 (1828-1851); Nov. 16,
1842.
“Hydrophobia and Dog-Laws,” Maine Farmer 17, no. 6 (1849).
Jones, Elizabeth J. The Young Abolitionists, or, Conversations on Slavery. Boston: Anti-Slavery
Office, 1849.
McCune Smith, James. “National Colored Convention Speech,” The Works of James McCune
Smith, May 8, 1855.
Nell, C. William. Services of Colored Americans, in the Wars of 1776 and 1812. Boston: Robert
F. Wallcut, 1852.
Pasteur, Louis. Germ Theory and its Applications to Medicine & on the Antiseptic Principle of
the Practice of Surgery, New York: Prometheus Books, reprinted 1996.
“AN ANALYSIS OF PREJUDICE,” The Atheneum; or, Spirit of the English Magazines.
Boston: John Cotton, Jun. 1830.
133
Redfield, J.S. “HYDROPHOBIA,” The Family Magazine; or, Monthly Abstract of General
Knowledge, no. 7 (New York: 1840).
Tarver, Micajah. letter to Sol Sublette, 31 August 1849, Sublette Papers, MHS.; Charles Derry,
"Autobiography of Charles Derry," Mormon Immigration Index, 268-270.
Tellier, Dr. “CHOLERAPHOBIA.: Cases of Choleraphobia; with Remarks on the Effects of Fear
as producing Disease during the present Epidemic Cholera,” The Boston Medical and
Surgical Journal 7, no. 22 (1833).
Thomas, Abel. Gospel of Slavery: A Primer of Freedom, New York: T.W. Strong, 1864.
Walker, David. Appeal to the Coloured Citizens of the World, But in Particular, and Very
Expressly, To Those of the United States of America. Boston: 1829.
Secondary Sources
Accessible Archives Inc.,“Provincial Freeman,”Accessed Mar. 15, 2016, http://www.accessiblearchives.com/collections/african-american-american-newspapers/provincial-freeman/.
Ayers, Edward L. The Promise of the New South: Life After Reconstruction. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1992.
Balmer, Randall and Winner, Lauren F. American Protestantism. New York City: Columbia
University Press, 2002.
Bay, Mia. The White Image in the Black Mind: African American Ideas about White People,
1830-1925. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Bender, Thomas. The Antislavery Debate: Capitalism and Abolitionism as a Problem in
Historical Interpretation. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992.
Bendroth, Margaret. The Last Puritans: Mainline Protestants and the Power of the Past. Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2015.
Berlin, Ira. Slaves Without Masters: The Free Negro in the Antebellum South. New York:
Pantheon Books, 1974.
The Living Bible: Paraphrased. Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, 1971.
Bonnett, Alastair. Anti-Racism. New York: Routledge, 2000.
Cumbler, John T. From Abolition to Rights for All: The Making of a Reform Community in the
Nineteenth Century. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008.
134
Dain, Bruce. A Hideous Monster of the Mind: American Race Theory in the Early Republic.
Cambridge. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2002.
Davis, David Brion. Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2006.
Drescher, Seymour. Abolition: A History of Slavery and Antislavery. New York: Cambridge
Univeristy Press, 2009.
Duffy, John. “A Note on Ante-bellum Southern Nationalism and Medical Practice.” The Journal
of Southern History 34, no. 2 (1968): 266-276.
Errera, Paul M.D., “Some Historical Aspects of the Concept, Phobia,” The Psychiatric Quarterly
36, no. 1-4 (1962): 325-336.
Fabian, Ann. The Skull Collectors: Race, Science, and America’s Unburied Dead. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 2010.
Finkelman, Paul. Defending Slavery: Proslavery Thought in the Old South: A Brief History with
Documents. Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003.
Frederickson, George M. The Black Image in the White Mind: The Debate on Afro-American
Character and Destiny, 1817-1914. New York City: Harper & Row, 1971.
Goodman, Paul. Of One Blood: Abolitionism and the Origins of Racial Equality. Berkeley and
Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2000.
Grob, Gerald. The Deadly Truth: A History of Disease in America. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 2005.
_____. The Mad Among Us: A History of the Care of America’s Mentally Ill. USA: Free Press,
2011.
Guelzo, Allen C. "Lincoln and the Abolitionists," The Wilson Quarterly, 8 (2000): 58-70.
Guillory, James Denny. “The Pro-Slavery Arguments of Dr. Samuel A. Cartwright.” Louisiana
History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association 9, no. 3 (1968). 209-227.
Habermas, Jürgen. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Cambridge: The MIT
Press; Reprint edition, 1991.
Hofstadter, Richard. The Age of Reform. New York: Vintage, 1960.
Holtzman, Ellen. “A Home Away From Home,” American Psychological Association 43, no.3
(2012).
135
Hornsby, Alton Jr. and Cianci Salvatore, Susan, Civil Rights in America: Racial Desegregation
of Public Accommodations. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, 2004.
Huston, James L. "The Experiential Basis of the Northern Antislavery Impulse," Journal of
Southern History 56, no. 4 (1990): 609-64.
Jacobs, Donald M. William Cooper Nell: Selected Writings 1832-1874. Baltimore: Black Classic
Press, 2002.
Jeffrey, Julie Roy. The Great Silent Army of Abolitionism: Ordinary Women in the Antislavery
Movement, (Chapel Hill and London: University of North Carolina Press, 1998).
Kiple, Kenneth and Virginia. “The African Connection: Slavery, Disease and Racism.” Phylon
41, no. 3 (1980): 211-222.
Kraditor, Aileen S. Means and Ends in American Abolitionism: Garrison and His Critics on
Strategy and Tactics, 1834-150. Lanham: Ivan R. Dee; Reprint edition, 1989.
Laud, Leslie E. “MORAL EDUCATION IN AMERICA: 1600s-1800s,” The Journal of
Education 179, no. 2 (1997): 1-10.
Litwack, Leon F. North of Slavery: The Negro in the Free States, 1790-1860. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1961.
Mandelker, Ira L. Religion, Society, and Utopia in Nineteenth-Century America. Amherst:
University of Massachusetts Press, 2009.
McDaniel, Caleb W. The Problem of Democracy in the Age of Slavery: Garrisonian
Abolitionists and Transatlantic Reform. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press,
2013.
McGerr, Michael. A Fierce Discontent: The Rise and Fall of the Progressive Movement in
America, 1870-1920. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
McKivigan, John R. The War Against Proslavery Religion: Abolitionism and Northern
Churches, 1830-1865. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1984.
Middleton, Stephen. The Black Laws: Race and the Legal Process in Early Ohio. Athens: Ohio
University Press, 2005.
Milkis, Sydney M. and Mileur, Jerome M. Progressivism and the New Democracy. Amherst:
University of Massachusetts Press, 1999.
Murphy, Angela F. American Slavery, Irish Freedom: Abolition, Immigrant Citizenship, and the
Transatlantic Movement for Irish Repeal. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press,
2010.
136
_____. “Slavery, Irish Nationalism, and Irish American Identity in the South, 1840-1845,” South
Carolina: University of South Carolina Press, 2012.
Newman, Richard S. The Transformation of American Abolitionism. Chapel Hill: University of
North Carolina Press, 2002.
Oakes, James. The Radical and the Republican: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the
Triumph of Antislavery Politics. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2007.
Osborn, Matthew Warner. Rum Maniacs: Alcoholic Insanity in the Early American Republic.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014.
Otter, Samuel. Philadelphia Stories: America’s Literature of Race and Freedom. New York:
Oxford University Press, 2010.
Price, George R. and Stewart, James Brewer. To Heal the Scourge of Prejudice: The Life and
Writings of Hosea Easton. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1999.
Rabinowitz, Howard N. Race Relations in the Urban South, 1865-1890. Athens: University of
Georgia Press, 1996.
_____. The First New South, 1865-1920. Illinois: Harlan Davidson, 1992.
Robertson, John G. An Excess of Phobias and Manias: A Compilation of Anxieties, Obsessions,
and Compulsions That Push Many over the Edge of Sanity. Los Angeles: Senior Scribe
Publications, 2003.
Rosenberg, Charles E. The Cholera Years: The United States in 1832, 1849 and 1886. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1962.
Ruchames, Louis. “Jim Crow Railroads in Massachusetts,” American Quarterly, (Spring 1956),
8.1, 61-75.
Savitt, Todd L. “The Use of Blacks for Medical Experimentation and Demonstration in the Old
South.” Southern Historical Association 48, no. 3 (1982): 331-348.
Schwartz, Marie Jenkins. Birthing a Slave: Motherhood and Medicine in the Antebellum South.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2006.
Sinha, Manisha. The Slave’s Cause: A History of Abolition. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 2016.
Smallman-Raynor, Matthew, Haggett Peter, and Andrew, Cliff. World Atlas of Epidemic
Diseases. U.S.: CRC Press, 2004.
Spring, Joel H., The American school, 1642-1990: varieties of historical interpretation of the
foundations and development of American education. New York: Longman, 1990.
137
Stauffer, John. The Black Hearts of Men: Radical Abolitionists and the Transformation of Race.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2004.
Stauffer, John. The Works of James McCune Smith. Oxford University Press, 2006.
Sterling, Dorothy. Ahead of Her Time: Abby Kelley and The Politics of Antislavery. New York
and London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1991.
Stewart, James Brewer. Holy Warriors: The Abolitionists and American Slavery. New York: Hill
and Wang, 1996.
Volk, Kyle G. Moral Minorities and the Making of American Democracy. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2014.
Waller, John C. Health and Wellness in 19th-Century America. Santa Barbara: Greenwood, 2014.
Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary. Springfield, MA: G. & C. Merriam Co., 1973.
Weiner, Marli Frances and Hough, Mazie. Sex, Sickness, and Slavery Illness in the Antebellum
South. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2012.
Wilentz, Sean, “New Introduction,” Appeal to the Coloured Citizens of the World, but in
particular, and very expressly, to those of The United States of America. New York: Hill
and Wang, 1995.
Willrich, Michael. City of Courts: Socializing Justice in Progressive Era Chicago. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Wiltse, Charles, "Introduction," Appeal to the Coloured Citizens of the World, but in particular,
and very expressly, to those of The United States of America. New York: Hill and Wang,
1965.
Woodward, C. Vann. The Strange Career of Jim Crow. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Zack, Naomi. Philosophy of Science and Race. New York and London: Routledge, 2002.
138